IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6945 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.450/2008 OF VARAPUZHA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 ------------------------------------------- SINOJ @ SIJO AGED 24 YEASRS, S/O.GEORGE, MUKKATH HOUSE, KAVILNADA, KOONAMMAVU.P.O, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE, PARAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 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 18/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No. 6945 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 452, 427, 324, 323, 294(b) IPC. According to prosecution, on 13.9.2008, at 4.30 p.m., petitioner along with two others took drinking water kept in the varandah of the shop and washed their legs and when defacto complainant questioned, A1 hit defacto complainant with a granite stone on several parts of the body and also abused him in obscene language and inflicted injures on defacto complainant. On a statement given by defacto complainant, a crime was registered against petitioner and other two accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the incident did not occur as alleged. There is a counter allegation with respect to the circumstances under which the incident happened and the merit of those were considered by this Court in order dated 20.10.2008 in B.A.No.6271/2008 which was filed by the first accused. At the time of hearing of that petition, learned public prosecutor pointed out that there are only minor injuries on finger of the defacto complainant. BA No.6945/2008 2 4. It is also submitted by learned public prosecutor that the allegations are mainly against first accused and he was granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Hence, he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. But, it was pointed out that a draft charge has already been sent for approval and charge sheet is filed without delay. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail and the following order is passed: Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and if any bail application is filed, petitioner shall be released on bail, on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions: (i) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence any witness or tamper with evidence or commit any offence while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl