IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 7TH ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5931 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.1212/08 OF ANGAMALY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.8 ------------------------------------------- V.C.LIJO, AGED 30, S/O.CHAKKAPPAN, VADAKKUMCHERIYIL HOUSE, ANNAPPARA P.O., MARYAPPARAVAZHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANGAMALY POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No.5931 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th September, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 326 read with 149 of Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, the petitioner along with other accused, formed into an unlawful assembly and assaulted the de facto complainant by using weapons and he sustained grievous injury. Petitioner is the 8th accused in the crime. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner's name was not mentioned in the First Information Statement. He is absolutely innocent of the allegations made and he has no connection with the crime. There is case that the petitioner has not committed any overt act, going by the First Information Statement, it is submitted. Petitioner is the door checker and there was some enmity between the first accused and the de facto complainant, but the petitioner has nothing to do with the act, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that as per the materials available in the case diary, all BA.5931/08 2 the accused were carrying weapons like iron rod, sword etc. Petitioner was also present at the scene. Petitioner was also carrying weapons. The weapons are not recovered and hence, petitioner's presence is required for interrogation and recovery of weapon. It may not be proper to grant anticipatory bail in an offence of this nature, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that the petitioner's presence would be required for effecting recovery and the petitioner is also implicated by the witnesses and hence, it may not be fit to grant anticipatory bail in an offence of this nature. The incident occurred on 10.8.2008 and the petitioner could not be arrested so far. The recovery of weapon is also to be effected. Hence, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within seven days from today and co-operate with the investigation. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.