IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2008 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3391 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.324 OF 2008 OF THE KOTTIYAM, POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO 1 AND 2: ----------------------------------------- 1. VINOD, S/O.SASIDHARAN, ANCHUKOICKAL KIZHAKKETHIL, PINACKAL CHERRY, MAYYANADU VILLAGE. 2. SHAJI, S/O.RAVEENDRAN, KODIMELKODI VEEDU NADUVILACKAL CHERRY, UMAYANALLOR P.O., MAYYANADU VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA SRI.M.T.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT GOVERNMENT PLEADER, KOLLAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. ----------------------------------- B.A. No. 3391 OF 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2008. O R D E R This is a petition for anticipatory bail. 2. On a complaint made by a pastor, on 19.04.2008, a crime was registered against the petitioners and few others under Sections 143, 147, 148, 153, 452, 324, 354, 427 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. According to the prosecution, the petitioners along with others formed an unlawful assembly and allegedly assaulted the de facto complainant and three others and they sustained injuries. The de facto complainant was hospitalized. The petitioners also used weapons like sticks. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are implicated in the offence under some wrong impression. It is stated in the First Information Statement that one Vinod and Shaji who are residing at the back side of the house of Rajamma had assaulted the de facto complainant and others. But, the petitioners who have the same names are not residing behind the house of Rajamma and hence there is some mistake in the identity. B.A. No. 3391/08 2 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that in investigation it is revealed that the petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the crime. Their names are already mentioned in the First Information Report itself and they are correctly identified also. It is also submitted that there is every likelihood to have a communal clash since the de facto complainant is a pastor and the petitioners and other accused are Hindus and the offence was committed since the de facto complainant had gone to the house of a Hindu woman for prayers when she was sick. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The petition is hence dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. smp