IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3372 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.398/10 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION (S): PETITIONER ------------------------------ 1. RENJITH S.T.,S/O.SANKARAN, URULEN KUNNUMMAL, THIRUVOD, NADUVANNUR (VIA) 2. R.K.FIBIN,S/O.KOHANAN,SATHYAPURI HOUSE, CHERUKAD, ATHYODI(VIA) 3. SURJITH,S/O.KUNJIKANNARAN, CHERUVANPOLI, THIRUVOD, NADUVANNUR. 4. ABHINU PRAKASH K.M., S/O.PRAKASAN, KIZHAKKEDATHIL, THIRUVOD P.O., NADUVANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KOYILANDY POLICE STATION, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.3372 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 16th June, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 332, 452 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioners (accused Nos.2, 1, 3 and 4) along with other accused, formed into an unlawful assembly and committed house trespass into a hospital building and voluntarily caused hurt to the watchman, who is a public servant, while he was in discharge of his official duty, by hitting him with iron block, and thereby committed various offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that certain persons had gone to meet a patient in the hospital. When the watchman objected to this, there was a wordy quarrel between the two but no offence, as alleged had taken place. It is also submitted that to the knowledge of petitioners, defacto complainant had not sustained any injury, even though iron block is allegedly used. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that considering the serious nature of the allegations made, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. It is also BA NO.3372/10 2 submitted that defacto complainant had sustained injuries, though those are not serious in nature. 5. On hearing both sides and considering the serious nature of the allegations made, I find that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. However, it appears that the injuries sustained by defacto complainant are only contusion and abrasion, which are simple in nature and hence petitioners have a strong and arguable case in respect of involvement of offence under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, the following order is passed : (i) Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate Court concerned without any delay. (ii) On such surrender, offence under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code will be treated as not involved, for the purpose of bail. Petition is disposed of accordingly. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs