IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3571 of 2010() --------------------------------------- CRIME NO.494/2010 OF OLLUR POLICE STATION ......... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 ---------------------- 1. MATHAI, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE, KORAPPILLIYIL HOUSE, MAROTTICHAL, THRISSUR. 2. SUNNY, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, MANNAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE, MAROTTICHAL, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.B.PRAJITH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. STATE OF EKRALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, OLLUR POLICE STATION, (CRIME NO.494 OF 2010), THRISSUR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEK CHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 3571 of 2010 ----------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 341, 324 and 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, on 18.05.2010 at about 8.30 P.M., petitioners in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted de facto complainant and his brother-in-law, and inflicted injuries on them and attempted to commit murder and thereby committed the above offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the incident did not happen, as alleged. Petitioners saw the de facto complainant and another person attacking a handicapped person. Petitioners intervened to rescue the handicapped person. While de facto complainant and other person tried to escape from the place on a motor cycle. This was prevented and the handicapped person was taken to the hospital by the first accused. This case is falsely foisted against petitioners. It is also submitted that there is no corresponding injury and offence under Section 326 B.A. No. 3571 of 2010 2 of the Indian Penal Code will not be attracted in this case. The said offence is included only for harassing petitioners, it is submitted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that only one person ie., de facto complainant's brother-in-law was injured and he had only a minor injury. The weapons allegedly used are iron rod and stone. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that petitioners were not able to establish the counter allegations made. There is nothing on record to probabilise such a case. However, injury sustained by de facto complainant's brother-in-law is a very minor injury having a length of 0.5 cm, even though, stone and iron rod were allegedly used against him. The de facto complainant did not sustain any injury. 6. In such circumstances, I find that petition has a strong and arguable case regarding the involvement of offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. But if petitioners are arrested, on the basis of present allegations made, it is likely that they will suffer irreparable injury and loss. Hence the following order is passed: B.A. No. 3571 of 2010 3 1. Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer within seven days from today and co-operate with the investigation. 2. On such surrender, if petitioners are arrested, offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code will be treated, as not included, for the purpose of bail. Petition is disposed of accordingly. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln B.A. No. 3571 of 2010 4