IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2008 / 29TH ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6150 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.142/2008 OF NEYYARDAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED --------------------------- SUMESH, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. SRI. SURESH, ASWATHY BHAVAN, VLAVETTI, KOTTOOR, MANNOORKKARA VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6150 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of October, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. A crime was registered against the petitioner under Section 338 IPC on the allegation that the defacto complainant, who was working as SLR worker in the irrigation department, was assaulted by the petitioner with intend to prevent or deter that person from discharging his duty. Petitioner wanted to get an entry pass, but, the de facto complainant refused to give the same and hence, the offence. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the crime was registered under Section 333 IPC on the premise that a grievous hurt was caused. But, later, it was altered to Section 332 IPC. There was only some altercation between petitioner and de facto complainant and no entry pass is required to get into the premises. Therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor BA No.6150/08 2 submitted that as per the medical records, de facto complainant lost his teeth. He sustained contusion on cheek, injury on the upper lip and there was also fracture on teeth and he was advised extraction of tooth. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides and on going through the case diary and in the nature of injuries caused, I find it difficult to accept the contentions that there was only a wordy altercation. I am not persuaded to invoke powers under Section 438 Crl.P.C. to grant anticipatory bail in an offence of this nature. The crime was registered as early as on 18.8.2008 and the petitioner was not available for arrest for the past more than two months and the investigation is at stand still. Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today and co-operate with the investigation. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl