IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 27TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7235 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 729/2008 OF CHALAKKUDY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 ------------------------------------------- SEBY, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.OUSEPH, MAMBRAPPILLY, KANJIRAPPALLY DESOM, PARIYARAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl.No. 7235 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of November, 2008. O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. Alleged offence are under sections 452, 323, 427, 506(ii) and 34 IPC and 27 of Arms Act. According to prosecution, petitioner (A3) along with two others in furtherance of common intention to commit various offences went to de facto complainant's house in a motor bike driven by petitioner. Accused 1 and 2 went inside the house asking for her son and assaulted de facto complainant and she was also criminally intimidated. Sword and stick were used by accused for assaulting de facto complainant. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner has not gone to the place of occurrence at all. Petitioner is a friend of 1st accused and hence, his name is falsely implicated in the crime. Even as per the prosecution allegation, petitioner has not taken any part in the assault and he has not got into the house. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner was implicated in another crime which allegedly BA 7235/2008 2 occurred after this occurrence and co-accused in that case are also accused 1 and 2 in this crime. It is also submitted that accused 1 and 2 in this case were released on bail. Therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner has clear involvement in the offence. He is the person who had taken accused 1 and 2 to the place of occurrence. Those persons were armed with weapons like sword and stick. The innocence of petitioner cannot be inferred only because petitioner was outside the house. It cannot be said that he had no common intention to commit the offence. It is true that de facto complainant was beaten up with hands. But weapons were used to destroy the articles in the house. Petitioner had gone to the house in search of de facto complainant's son and since he was not available his mother was assaulted. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that petitioner is involved in another crime also. In the nature of allegations made, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides, in the nature of allegations made, I find that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioner is directed to BA 7235/2008 3 surrender before the police and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. Petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn. BA 7235/2008 4