IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2010 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2679 of 2010() ---------------------------------- CRIME NO.231/2010 OF THRIKODITHANAM POLICE STATION. .......... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ------------------------ PRAKASH,S/O.GOPI,KAITHAYAL HOUSE, MADAPPALLY VILLAGE,MADAPPALLY KARA,MADAPPALLY.PO, CHANGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.S.K.AJAY KUMAR SMT.PRIYA. H. SRI.V.G.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,S.I.OF POLICE,THRIKODITHANAM POLICE STATION,REPRESENTED BY THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss K. HEMA, J ---------------------- B.A.No.2679 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of May, 2010 O R D E R This is a petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 452, 427, 323, 294(b) of IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner trespassed into a bakery run by defacto complainant on 12.4.2010 and destroyed the articles kept in the bakery because of previous enemity. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that when petitioner went to the bakery, he did not find anybody in the counter. Hence, he shouted the name of the owner of the bakery, while owner, who is the defacto complainant and the ASI came out and petitioner was pushed out of the bakery. In the course of this, the articles were damaged. Petitioner is innocent. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor B.A. No.2679/10 2 submitted that as per the allegations in the complaint, petitioner had gone to the bakery about one hour prior to the incident and there was an accident. Flying squard came and petitioner was taken away. Petitioner was under the impression that defacto complainant had informed police and hence, infuriated by this, he came to the bakery again after he was released by flying squard and committed offence. 5. On hearing both sides, petitioner has made some counter allegations about the manner in which the incident happened, but there are no materials to support his plea. Considering the nature of allegations made by prosecution, I find that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou.