IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2008 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 2167 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NUMBER NOT KNOWN OF MALA POLICE STATION, TRICHUR : PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- ABHILASH.K.S., S/O.SIVAN, KUNNUMEL, POYYA. BY ADV. SRI.M.G.DEVIPRASADAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB- INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.2167 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner is the sole accused. There are two injured persons - a father and his son. The alleged incident took place on 23.03.08. F.I statement was lodged on 26.03.08. It would appear that there was no prior acquaintance between the victims and the petitioner herein. There was an incident in which the petitioner's vehicle was involved in an accident. There was exchange of words and altercation on that aspect. Enraged by the said incident, the petitioner is alleged to have trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and assaulted them by using a stone wrapped in cloth. Allegations are raised for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 308 I.P.C. That is the only non bailable offence alleged. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and at any rate inclusion of the allegation under Section 308 I.P.C is not justified at all. The inclusion of the said allegation reveals the clout of the victims with the police and the willingness of the police to oblige them by raising any fanciful allegations. In any view of the matter, the inclusion of the offence B.A.No.2167 of 2008 2 under Section 308 I.P.C is not justified. Such inclusion is made with the transparent motive of vexing and harassing the petitioner. The only attempt is to ensure that the petitioner remains in custody for as long a period as possible. 3. The case diary has been placed before me. I have perused the same. I have in particular taken note of the injuries suffered by the two victims. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application after discussions at the Bar and I am satisfied, in these circumstances, that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory subject of course to appropriate terms and conditions. In the absence of opposition, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail in this order. 4. In the result, this Bail Application is, allowed. The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11 a.m on 15.04.2008. He shall be enlarged on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate; ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and B.A.No.2167 of 2008 3 1 p.m on 16.04.2008 and 17.04.2008. During this period, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps for the proper conduct of the investigation. Thereafter the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 12 noon on all Mondays and Fridays for a period of two months and subsequently as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so; iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if those directions were not issued at all; iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 15.04.08 as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released from custody on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 15.04.08. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- B.A.No.2167 of 2008 4