IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 20TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7881 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.208/2009 OF KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED. --------------------------------------- 1. K.T.LIJESH @ BOBBY, S/O. KUMARAN, AGED 29 YEARS, PAINTER, RESIDING AT "KAKKIRIKKAN HOUSE", P.O.CHOVVA, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. C.H.AFSAL, S/O. MOOSA, AGED 29 YEARS, DRIVER, RESIDING AT "CHERIYANDY HOUSE", KURUVA P.O., KADALAYI, KANNUR - 7. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.ABDUL AZEEZ SRI.RENJIT GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE. --------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. S.H.O., KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.7881 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of February, 2010 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 1 respectively in Crime No.208 of 2009 of Kannur Town Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 332, 323 and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 2.5.2009, while the de facto complainant, the driver of a KSRTC bus, was attempting to take the bus on the reverse direction, the accused persons abused the driver of the bus and attacked him. The conductor of the bus was also abused and attacked. It is alleged that the accused persons took away the switch key of the bus. It is also alleged that the de facto complainant was prevented from discharging his official duties. The further allegation is that the accused persons were under the influence of alcohol and that they are employees in a private bus. BA No.7881/2009 2 4. The second petitioner produced a wound certificate before the learned Sessions Judge to support the contention that he sustained injury as a result of the hit by the KSRTC bus. The learned Sessions Judge noticed that the de facto complainant in the present case was admitted in the hospital and the FI statement was recorded much earlier to the point of time of which the second petitioner was allegedly admitted in the hospital. Prima facie, this would show that the second petitioner had attempted to create documents to escape from the allegations levelled against him. For the aforesaid reasons and also taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioners are not entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl