IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2008 / 9TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4181 of 2008() ----------------------------- MP.2657 2/2008 of J.M.F.C.-I,KOCHI CRIME NO.439/08 OF NJARACKAL POLICE STATION PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED --------------------------------------- ROBIN, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, PULLICKAL VEEDU, NAYARAMBALAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.T.N.SURESH SRI.ROY THOMAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NJARACKAL. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------ Bail Appl.No. 4181 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of June, 2008. ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. petitioner is the 2nd accused in a crime registered under Sections 452, 323, 324, 294(b) and 34 of IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner and another trespassed into the house of de facto complainant and committed various offences by assaulting him using iron rod etec. and also kicked him. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a false case is foisted against the petitioner. According to him, the petitioner and his mother were attacked by de facto complainant and four others. They were beaten with iron rod. The incident started from the road, and when the petitioner ran into his house, the accused trespassed into the house and assaulted the petitioner's mother and both of them were hospitalised on the same day at 10.35 p.m. The medical certificates are also produced. Annexure-I medical certificate issued to the petitioner shows that he had an abrasion and [B.A.4181/08] 2 contusion around right eye, tenderness scalp, left shoulder and chest. 4. Both petitioner and his mother were admitted in the hospital and were discharged only on 31.5.2008. According to petitioner, the doctor had given intimation to the police, but nobody came to record their statement. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, this happened due to the political influence of the de facto complainant. Hence, a complaint was given to the Circle Inspector, a copy of which is marked as Annexure-III, pointing out these facts. Still, no crime was registered by the police and the petitioner's mother was forced to file a private complaint before court and a copy is Annexue-IV. The said complaint was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per his instructions, the first information statement is given in this case only after two days and the present crime is registered against the petitioner and another only after knowing that petitioner and his mother were hospitalised. As per the allegations in the complaint, the petitioner and his cousin had trespassed into the “house” of de facto complainant and [B.A.4181/08] 3 assaulted him with “iron rod”. He was also allegedly kicked when he fell down, and hence he went to the hospital. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that de facto complainant was hospitalised only on 28.5.2008 in the evening as per his information and that too at Malippuram hospital which is 8 kms. away from the place of occurrence. 6. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the records will reveal that the de facto complainant was hospitalised on the same day and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner that they were hospitalised on 28.5.2008 is not correct. On a perusal of the wound certificate in the case diary, it is seen that de facto complainant was hospitalised on 27.5.2008 at 10.45 p.m. 7. On hearing both sides and on going through the case diary, the following facts are revealed: The de facto complainant was hospitalised on 27.5.2008 at 10.45 P.M. as brought by his father and the alleged cause of injury was “assault by four or five recognisable people at 10.15 p.m. on 27.5.2008 with hand”. There was only complaints of pain on the left chest. No other injury was noted. There is no case that the incident happened in the house. As per the first information statement given after two [B.A.4181/08] 4 days, it is specifically alleged that the incident happened inside the house of de facto complainant and he was beaten with iron rod and he was also kicked, though the allegation to the doctor was that he was beaten by hand. Thus, there are contradictions in the first information statement and the wound certificate issued which require explanation by the injured and the prosecution at the time of trial. In such circumstances, I find that anticipatory bail an be granted to the petitioner. Hence, the following order is passed: Petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of his arrest, on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that he will cooperate with the investigation. Petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.