IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2429 of 2010() -------------------------------------- CRMP.1081/2010 of DIST & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA. CRIME NO. 201/2010 OF MUHAMMA POLICE STATION, CHERTHALA .................... PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED --------------------------- KUNJUMON, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. THANKAPPAN, KUNNEVELI HOUSE, THANNEERMUKKOM PANCHAYATH, WARD XI, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMANATHAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUHAMMA POLICE STATION, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss K. HEMA, J ---------------------- B.A.No.2429 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 326 and 308 IPC. According to the prosecution on 30.3.2010 at about 9.30 pm. petitioner attacked defacto complainant near a pathway, lying close to the house of defacto complainant, using a knife, out of the enemity which arose on a dispute regarding the pathway. Defacto complainant sustained grievous hurt. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no incident as alleged has occurred. Petitioner had allowed defacto complainant to use pathway running through his property, but asked him not to ride motor cycle through the property, as it will endanger the child aged three years, who used to play in the courtyard. Out of this enemity, defacto complainant attacked the petitioner while he was sleeping in the courtyard in a coat with his wife and children on the date of occurrence since it was too hot a B.A. No.2429/10 2 day. The defacto complainant had came to the scene of occurrence with a sword and there was a scuffle when the sword fell down and defacto complainant happened to fall on the sword and he sustained injury. He also submitted that incident happened at 9 pm. and the present complaint is filed stating that the incident happened at 9.30 pm. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this bail application and submitted that the materials in the case diary revealed that the incident alleged in the first information statement had taken place. The defacto complainant sustained grievous hurt and he was stabbed twice by the petitioner using a knife, one on the palm and another on the scapula, by which the vein was cut. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that learned counsel fore petitioner was not even able to state whether petitioner sustained injury in the course of the incident, which allegedly took place, according to his version. It would also appear from his own submissions that petitioner was attacked at 9 pm. where the incident in this case had taken place at 9.30 pm. It is not very clear whether the two incidents are separate or one and the same. No ground is made for granting anticipatory bail. Petitioner is bound to appear before the investigating officer and B.A. No.2429/10 3 co-operate with the investigation. 6. Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer within 7 days from today and co-operate with the investigation. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou.