IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2009 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2758 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.146/09 OF KANJAR POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- JOHNY S/O. DEVASIA, AGED 77 YEARS, MUNDAPPILLIL HOUSE, KUTHUNKAL KARA, UDUMBANCHOLA VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT MUNDAPPILLIL HOUSE, TOLL JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR SMT.LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL SMT.P.A.PRIYA RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANJAR POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------- B.A.No.2758 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.146 of 2009 of Kanjar Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under sections 324 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The accused is the father-in-law of the defacto complainant. The case diary reveals that a few days before the incident, the accused came and resided at the residence of his son-in-law. Father-in-law wanted to deposit the money realised on account of sale of his property, in the name of the grand children. The defacto complainant, who is the son-in-law, wanted to get the money in cash. He was against depositing the money in the name of his children. The father-in-law took the photographs of the children of the defacto complainant for the purpose of making deposit. There was quarrel between the parties on that night. 4. The prosecution case is that on 1.5.2009 at 5.30 A.M., BA No.2758/2009 2 the accused inflicted serious injuries on the defacto complainant by hitting with an iron bar. The statement of the daughter of the accused and her children also corroborate the same, submits the public prosecutor. The wound certificate is not made available for perusal. It is clear from the statement of the defacto complainant that the accused lived in his house for a few days happily. The dispute was only regarding how the money was to be utilised. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused is aged 77 years. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail for a period of one month on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; BA No.2758/2009 3 B) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. E) On the expiry of the period mentioned above, the petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate concerned and seek regular bail. F) 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 csl