IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2011 / 19TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6061 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.691/2011 OF SOORANAD POLICE STATION KOLLAM DISTRICT PETITIONERS : ACCUSED : ----------------------- 1. UDAYAN, S/O.THANKAPPAN, AGED 34 YEARS, PARAPPURATH KIZHEKKETHIL HOUSE, EDAKKAD MURI, PORUVAZHI VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. MOHANAN, S/O.THANKAPPAN,AGED 49 YEARS, PARAPPURATH KIZHEKKETHIL HOUSE, EDAKKAD MURI, PORUVAZHI VILLAGE, KUNATHOOR TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT 3. VISWANATHAN, S/O.THANKAPPAN, AGED 49 YEARS, PARAPPURATH KIZHEKKETHIL HOUSE, EDAKKAD MURI, PORUVAZHI VILLAGE, KUNATHOOR TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.DILEEP RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.6061 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.691 of 2011 of Sooranad Police Station, Kollam District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 447, 323 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 27/06/2011 at 9.30 P.M., the accused persons attacked the de facto complainant which resulted in the loss of four teeth in the upper jaw and loosening of one tooth in the lower jaw of the de facto complainant. It is seen that the grievous hurt was caused as a result of the attack made by the accused No.1 with a stick. The allegation against accused Nos.2 and 3 is that they had beaten the de facto complainant with hands. The grievous hurt sustained by the de facto complainant is not attributable to the overt acts alleged against accused Nos.2 and 3. Bail Appln.No.6061/2011 : 2 : 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offences and the injuries sustained by the de facto complainant, I am not inclined to grant the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in favour of the first petitioner/first accused. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners 2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioners 2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The petitioners 2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; Bail Appln.No.6061/2011 : 3 : C) The petitioners 2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioners 2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is dismissed in so far as it relates to first petitioner/ first accused and it is allowed in the manner indicated above in so far as it relates to petitioners 2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj