IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4431 of 2008(F) -------------------------- ORDER DATED 19.05.08 IN B.A.NOS.3162/2008 AND 3164/2008 PETITIONER: --------------- ABDUL RAHMAN @ ASSI, S/O. MAKKAR, THACHETHU HOUSE, PAYIPARA KARA, MULAVUR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) SRI.PRASANTH M.P RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SHAFI, S/O. RASHEED, EZHUTHANIKKAT HOUSE MANARY P.O., PAYIPRA, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. NAZR, S/O. SAIDU, PARUTHIKKATTU HOUSE, MANARY P.O., PAYIPRA, MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. KAMARUDDIN, S/O. MEERAN, EDASSERYKKUDY HOUSE, MANARY P.O., PAYIPRA, MUVATTUPUZHA. 4. SHAMEER, S/O. BHAVA, THADATHIKUNNEL HOUSE, MANARY P.O., PAYIPRA, MUVATTUPUZHA. 5. KAREEM, S/O.MOIDEEN, EZHUTHANIKKATTU HOUSE, MULAVUR VILLAGE, MANARY P.O. PAYIPRA MUVATTUPUZHA. 6. SUDHEER, S/O. ABDUL WAHID, EZHUTHANIKKATTU HOUSE, MULAVUR VILLAGE MANARY P.O., PAYIPRA, MUVATTUPUZHA. 7. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUV ATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION. 8. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSEUCOTR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM SRI.N.N.ELAYATH FOR R1-6 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.4431 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of January, 2009 ORDER Petitioner is the defacto complainant in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 307 r/w 149 I.P.C. Party respondents herein are the accused. By Annexures II and III orders, the accused persons were granted anticipatory bail and regular bail by this Court on identical terms and conditions. They are on bail now. Investigation is now complete and final report has already been filed. The defacto complainant and the accused are neighbours. There is disagreement and a number of disputes between them, it is submitted. Later, Crime Nos.1382 and 1383 of 2008 were registered by the Muvattupuzha police on the basis of allegations and counter allegations raised by the parties about an incident that had taken place on 26.10.08. The petitioner has come to this Court complaining about the violation of the conditions of bail bond by the respondents/accused as evidenced by their alleged conduct in respect of which Crime No.1383 of 2008 was registered at the Muvattupuzha Police Station. 2. The respondents have entered appearance through counsel. They contend that the allegations in Crime No.1383 of Crl.M.C. No.4431 of 2008 2 2008 is totally false. The boot is really on the other leg. The petitioner herein and his people had committed crimes in respect of which Crime No.1382 of 2008 was registered. As a counter blast against that, counter allegations were raised and Crime No.1383 of 2008 was registered. The allegations are totally false and are invented only for the purpose of vexing and harassing the respondents herein. Bail granted to the respondents may not be cancelled on the basis of Crime No.1383 of 2998 registered at the Muvattupuzha Police Station, submits the learned counsel for the respondents/accused. 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor after taking instructions has filed a statement, a copy of which was made available for my perusal. The Registry shall keep the original statement in the file. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the State does not feel it necessary to cancel the bail granted already in favour of respondents 1 to 6. The parties are at loggerheads and investigation has revealed to the police that the allegations raised in Crime No.1382 of 2008 are correct and the allegations raised in Crime No.1383 of 2008 are false and are only a retaliation against Crime No.1382 of 2008 registered. Crl.M.C. No.4431 of 2008 3 4. I have considered all the relevant circumstances. I take note of the conditions of bail. I take note of the alleged breach. I take note of the stand taken by the learned Public Prosecutor that the State does not perceive the necessity to cancel the bail already granted to respondents 1 to 6. I take note of the further statement that a positive final report has been filed after completion of the investigation in Crime No.1382 of 2008 and a negative final report (refer report) has been filed after completing the investigation in Crime No.1383 of 2008. I am not, in these circumstances, persuaded to agree that the orders granting bail to the respondents by Annexures-II & III deserve to be cancelled. Sufficient reasons to justify resort to the exceptional and harsh remedy of law for cancellation of bail have not been made available at all. 5. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-