IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2008 / 13TH SRAVANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4835 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.354/2008 OF PARASSALA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/5TH ACCUSED:- ----------------------------------------- DOMINIC, AGED 29, S/O THANKAYYAN NADAR, PUTHUVAL PUTHAN VEEDU, MURIYANKARA DESOM, PARASSALA VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARASSALA POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.4835 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of August, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 452, 324, 308 and 34 IPC. Petitioner is the 5th accused in the crime. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner's name was not mentioned in the FIR. Petitioner is admittedly a close neighbour of the defacto complainant and petitioner is known to the defacto complainant also. Defacto complainant's brother had attacked the petitioner in an earlier incident and the wound certificate is produced as Annexure III. Because of this incident, petitioner was falsely implicated in this case, by giving a subsequent statement, it is submitted. The reason stated for crucial omission to mention in FIR was explained by the defacto complainant stating that he was suffering much pain and hence, he omitted to mention the name. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor submitted that the petitioner's involvement is clearly revealed in the subsequent statement made by the defacto complainant. It is BA No.4835/08 2 also submitted that the occurrence witnesses also stated that the petitioner was involved in the offence. However, it is conceded that no weapons were used by the petitioner and hence, he will not be required for the purpose of recovery of any weapon. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: Petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest, if any, on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that he will report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed and co-operate with the investigation. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl