IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA SUNDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2008 / 23RD POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 7679 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.1240/08 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION PETITIONER -------------------- AJIN GEORGE, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. GEORGE, STELLA MANDIRAM, ASRAMAM CHERRY KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, THOROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/01/2009, THE COURT ON 13/01/2008 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 7679 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 341, 294(B), 324, 326, 308, 427 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner (first accused) allegedly wrongfully restrained de facto complainant by catching hold of the handle of the motor cycle, in which he was travelling. While second accused beat de facto complainant's brother with an iron rod and all other accused assaulted the de facto complainant and his brother. De facto complainant's brother sustained fracture to the leg and also the lower jaw. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioenr is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. He has no motive against de facto complainant or his brother to act in the manner alleged. Petitioner was going for purchasing medicine for his ailing father, when he saw de facto complainant and another (who came in a motor cycle) assaulting certain persons with iron rod etc. He intervened, while de facto complainant BA.7679/08 2 beat with an iron rod and he sustained a lacerated wound on the head. He was immediately taken to the hospital. He had told the doctor that he was beaten up in the circumstances stated above. He had also given a complaint to the police. But, no crime was registered by the police. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that though petitioner allegedly assaulted de facto complainant, even as per his own statement, he used the iron pipe taken from another accused to beat de facto complainant which he evaded. Therefore, no injury was inflicted by petitioner either on de facto complainant or on his friend. Petitioner can establish his case only during the trial. It is also pointed out that prosecution has no explanation for the injury sustained by petitioner. In such circumstances, if petitioner is remanded to custody on his surrender, it will cause irreparable injury and loss, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner has a role in the incident and it is spoken to by de facto complainant in the First Information Statement. It is alleged that he had held the handle of the motor cycle while other accused assaulted him with iron rod etc. and de facto BA.7679/08 3 complainant had also beaten with an iron pipe which he had taken from another accused, though the blow was evaded by de facto complainant. It is submitted that recovery is to be effected and as per the materials available, the weapons are handed over to first accused. Therefore, it may not be proper to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 6. On hearing both sides and on perusing the wound certificate relating to petitioner and also the alleged history given to the doctor, the copy of complaint made by him and the various facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the prosecution has not explained the injury sustained by petitioner (who is first accused), I am satisfied that petitioner has to be given an opportunity to establish his defence (particularly since no injury is sustained by either de facto complainant or his brother at the hands of petitioner) and if he is remanded on refusal of anticipatory bail, it is likely that he will put to irreparable injury and loss. Hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: BA.7679/08 4 1) Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer within seven days from today and he shall make himself available for interrogation. He shall also co-operate with the investigation. 2) Thereafter, if petitioner is arrested, he shall be produced before the Magistrate Court concerned in accordance with law and the learned Magistrate is directed to release the petitioner on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate Court concerned, on the following conditions: i) Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed. iii). Petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witnesses or intimidate them or commit any offence while on bail. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.