IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2011 / 11TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 7107 of 2011 CRIME NO.442 OF 2011 OF POOVAR POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONERES : ACCUSED 2 TO 4 ---------------------------------- 1. VIPIN JOSE, S/O.KOCHUKUNJAN, IRAYILVILA VEEDU,THIRUPURAM P.O, NEYYATTINKARA. 2. ABIN JOSE,D/O.KOCHUKUNJAN, IRAYILVILA VEEDU,THIRUPURAM P.O, NEYYATTINKARA. 3. KOCHU KUNJAN, IRAYILVILA VEEDU,THIRUPURAM P.O, NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT: STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 7107 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners, three in number, say that they are accused Nos.2 to 4 in Crime No.442 of 2011 of Poovar Police Station. They apprehend arrest on an accusation of having committed non-bailable offence. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the third petitioner was deleted from the array of accused and that petitioners 1 and 2 are respectively accused Nos.2 and 3 in the case. 3. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i) and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. The date of occurrence was on 31.7.2011 at 9.30 P.M. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the fracture BAIL APPL. NO. 7107 OF 2011 :: 2 :: sustained by the de facto complainant is attributable to the assault made by accused No.1 with a stone. The counsel submitted that the allegation against accused Nos.2 and 3 is that they had beaten the de facto complainant with hands. No serious injury was caused due to the overt acts alleged against petitioners 1 and 2. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, the injury sustained and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioners 1 and 2 (accused Nos.2 and 3). There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of petitioners 1 and 2 (accused Nos.2 and 3), the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rupees Ten thousand each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) Petitioners 1 and 2 (accused Nos.2 and 3) shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays for a period of two months; b) Petitioners 1 and 2 (accused Nos.2 and 3) shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; BAIL APPL. NO. 7107 OF 2011 :: 3 :: c) Petitioners 1 and 2 (accused Nos.2 and 3) shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) Petitioners 1 and 2 (accused Nos.2 and 3) shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/