IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 463 of 2009() ---------------------------- CMP.171/2009 of J.M.F.C.-I MUVATUPUZHA CRIME NO.51/09 OF PIRAVOM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. ANISH CHANDRAN,S/O.RAMACHANDRAN,RANI SADANAM,AYIROORPADAM KARA,THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. SAJAN,S/O.THAMPY,PUTHUVELIL VEEDU, MAKKAPPUZHA KARA,CHENNAKKAL VILLAGE,PATHANAMTHITTA RANNI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY P.PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM(CRIME 51 OF 2009 OF PIRAVOM POLICE STATION). PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 463 of 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 294(b) and 308 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioners are driver and cleaner of a private bus. De facto complainant's relative died in an accident in which the same bus was driven in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident. Infuriated by this, a protest was made, in which de facto complainant took the lead. Because of this, petitioners, who are driver and cleaner, committed the present offences in furtherance of a common intention and the bus hit against a Maruti car, which was driven by de facto complainant. He was also abused in filthy language. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the incident did not occur as alleged. It is true that the bus was involved in another incident and de facto complainant's relative happened to die, but first petitioner was not the driver BA.463/09 2 at the time of the accident. On the date of occurrence, a Maruti car was driven in front of the bus, without giving side for a pretty long time, and suddenly, the Maruti car stopped in front of the bus and two persons came out of the bus, pulled first accused by force out of the bus and he was beaten up. In the meanwhile, he lost control of the vehicle and it happened to hit at the backside of the Maruti car. In respect of this, the manager of the bus service filed a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Alwaye and the copy is Annexure-2. Petitioners were arrested on 20.1.2009 and they are in custody since then. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the manner in which the incident happened is to be taken into account and it is not a fit case to grant bail to petitioners. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that de facto complainant sustained only minor injury and the question whether it was an intentional act or only an accident, is to be decided at the time of trial, especially in the light of the specific defence taken up by accused. I do not find that further detention of petitioner will serve any purpose. BA.463/09 3 Hence, bail is granted to petitioners on the following terms and conditions: i) Petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate Court concerned. ii) Petitioners shall report before the investigating officer on every Sunday between 10 AM and 1 PM until further orders. iii). Petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witnesses or intimidate them or commit any offence while on bail and in case of breach of this condition, the bail is liable to be cancelled. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.