IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6554 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.539/2011 OF PALODU POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM PETITIONERS : ACCUSED 1 & 2 ------------------------------- 1. A.NASARUDHEEN, AGD 33 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEENKUNJU, P.M.P.HOUSE, EDAVAM, EDINJAR, PERINGAMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SALIM, S/O.ABDUL LATHEEF, ASIYA MANZIL, KOLACHAL, EDAVAM, EDINJAR, PERINGAMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.ZIYAD SRI.SANU.S.PANICKER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.K.RENJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.6554 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 20th 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 are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.539 of 2011 of Palodu Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 324, 308 and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The prosecution case is the following : On 21.7.2011 at about 8.30 p.m., while the de facto complainant was travelling in an autorickshaw, the accused persons came in a jeep, intercepted the autorickshaw and assaulted the de facto complainant. It is alleged that A1 used a sword and inflicted injuries on the head and other parts of the body of the de facto complainant. Accused No.2 attacked the de facto complainant BA 6554/11 2 with an iron pipe on his forehead and head. It is also alleged that the accused destroyed the autorickshaw causing a loss of ` 5,000/-. The de facto complainant was taken to the Taluk Head Quarters Hospital from where he was taken to the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. The wounds on his head were sutured wounds. The allegation is that the de facto complainant was attacked by the accused on account of the enmity towards the de facto complainant as he filed a complaint against the accused before the police. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that on 13.5.2011, the de facto complainant was attacked by the accused and Crime No.372 of 2011 was registered against them for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 341, 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code. After completing the investigation, charge was laid in that case. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that Crime Nos.554 of 2011, 555 of 2011 and 556 of 2011 were registered against the accused under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the accused BA 6554/11 3 persons are regularly involved in criminal activities and that they have become a menace to the society. 5. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are grave in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioners are entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl