IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 7TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5384 of 2009() ------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 917/2009 OF IRINJALAKUDA P0LICE STATION ................ PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.9,3,8,10,5,7 & 6 : --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SINOJ @ KANNAN, 22 YEARS, S/O.VIJAYAN, MANAKKATTUMPADY HOUSE, PORATHATTU, PORATHUSSERI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. ANEESH, S/O.ANILAN, 21 YEARS, KUTTASSERI HOUSE, PORATHATTU ,PORATHUSSERI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. GITHU, AGED 24 YEARS,S/O.KUTTAPPAN, KUMBATHERI HOUSE,THALIYAKKONAM, PORATHUSSERI VILLAGE,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. SINTO, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.ANTHONY, MANJALY HOUSE, PORATHATTU DESOM, PORATHUSSERI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. MANIKANDAN THELAPPILLY, 37 YEARS, S/O.CHANDRAN, MAKKOTHU HOUSE, THALIYAKKONAM, MADAIKKONAM VILLAGE. 6. RAJEEV, 31 YEARS,S/O.GOPALAN,KAIPPULLY HOUSE, THELIYAKKONAM,MADAIKKONAM VILLAGE. 7. MANIKANDAN, 30 YEARS, S/O. RAJAN, KOODARATHIL HOUSE, THELIYAPPILLY, THALIYAKKONAM, MADAIKKONAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 5384 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of September, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos. 4, 3, 8, 9, 5, 6 and 7 in Crime No. 917/2009 of Irinjalakuda Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have also perused the Case Diary. The wound certificate discloses fracture of tooth of one of the injured persons. The allegation is that the accused persons attacked the defacto complainant and others in a bar hotel with deadly weapons. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioners are entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln