IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6597 of 2008(F) ------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 217/2008 OF POOVAR POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 & 2 : -------------------------------------------- 1. DEEPU S/O SUKUMARAN, S.V. BHAVANAM, VALIYAPLANKALA, KUZHINJA VILAKAM, POOVAR P.O. 2. SHIJI, S/O. BABU, SHIJI BHAVAN, EADUTHICHARICHAN VILLA, ARUMANOOR, POOVAR P.O. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.6597 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 394 of I.P.C. According to prosecution, on 09.10.2008 at about 9 p.m., petitioners (accused nos.1 and 2) were travelling on a motor bike and they were trying to overtake the K.S.R.T.C. bus driven by defacto complainant. Since they could not overtake, they were offended and when defacto complainant came out of the K.S.R.T.C. bus station and was waiting for bus to go to his house, petitioners went to him and assaulted him and took away Rs.250/- from his pocket and also duty pass, driving licence etc. by force. He was beaten up and kicked and he sustained injuries. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that no robbery is involved in this case. The offence under Section 394 of I.P.C. will be attracted only if the intention is to commit robbery and in order to commit robbery, hurt is B.A.6597 of 2008 2 caused. Here, there was only an altercation between two, since the petitioners were not allowed to overtake the bus. If at all some articles are removed from defacto complainant, it cannot be said that they commit robbery under Section 394 of I.P.C., even if he is assaulted. Petitioners are innocent and they may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners were involved, since they could not overtake K.S.R.T.C. bus driven by defacto complainant. They have acted in an objectionable manner and assaulted the driver and also forcibly taken away the articles from his pocket. Even if offence under Section 394 of I.P.C. is not attracted, the offences under Sections 323 and 379 of I.P.C. will be clearly attracted. In an offence of this nature, it is not fit to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. The crime was registered as early as on 09.10.2008. The petitioners could not be arrested and the articles could not be recovered. They are required for interrogation and recovery, it is submitted. B.A.6597 of 2008 3 On hearing both sides, I am satisfied of the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor. In an offence of this nature, even if offence under section 394 of I.P.C. is not attracted, the allegations made are serious in nature and those do not persuade me to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioners are required for interrogation and effecting recovery of articles which are allegedly taken away by them. The crime was registered as early as on 09.10.2008 and the investigation cannot have considerable progress unless petitioners are interrogated. Hence, petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today and co-operate with the investigation. This direction, however, will not in any manner bar police from arresting petitioners. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac