IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6420 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 479/2008 OF NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER (S): IST ACCUSED ------------------------------- JAYAN, S/O. SUSEELAN PANICKER, GEETHA BHAVAN, ALUVILA, NEA4R VENKULAM, KULATHAMMAL DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.D.ASOKAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANTS --------------------------- 1. STAQTE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6420 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 341, 323, 324 and 326 IPC read with section 27 of the Arms Act. According to prosecution, on 24-8-2008 at 7.30 a.m. petitioner (A1) along with six others trespassed into the house of de facto complainant and assaulted him by using weapons like sword, iron rod and inflicted injuries on him. The 1st accused used sword and de facto complainant sustained fracture to his leg. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. De facto complainant was engaged in illicit liquor business and petitioner had informed the matter to the police. Therefore, there was enmity for de facto complainant towards petitioner and hence de facto complainant assaulted petitioner in the year 2007 and a crime was registered as Crime no.477/2007 under sections 307 and 34 IPC. The committal proceedings in the said crime are pending. Thereafter, on 10-8-2008 at 10.30 a.m. de facto complainant's associate trespassed into the house of petitioner and abused his wife and committed mischief in the house. He was also holding a sword in his hand and a crime was registered as BA 6420/08 -2- Crime no.454/2008. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the case diary reveals that an assault was made on de facto complainant by petitioner and others and weapon was also used. De facto complainant sustained fracture and other serious injuries and petitioner used a sword for commission of offence, which is not yet recovered. Petitioner is required for interrogation and recovery of weapon, it is submitted. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 5. On hearing both sides, the contentions raised by petitioner that he is absolutely innocent of the allegations are contrary to the materials revealed from case diary. Considering the nature of allegations made, the nature of injuries caused, the manner in which the incident occurred and the nature of investigation required, etc., I am not satisfied that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Recovery of weapon is to be effected and petitioner will be required for interrogation by the police. The incident occurred as early as on 24-8-2008 and petitioner is not available for investigation and the investigation in a stand still. Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Magistrate court concerned or before the BA 6420/08 -3- Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest petitioner at any time. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.