IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD OCTOBER 2009 / 1ST KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4310 of 2009 CRIME NO.686 OF 2009 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. BHASKARAN, MANGALATHUCHIRA HOUSE, LAKSHAMVEED COLONY, THOTTAPPUZHA, ERAVIPEROOR. 2. JAYAN, MANGALATHUCHIRA HOUSE, LAKSHAMVEED COLONY, THOTTAPPUZHA, ERAVIPEROOR. 3. JAYESH, MANGALATHUCHIRA HOUSE, LAKSHAMVEED COLONY, THOTTAPPUZHA, ERAVIPEROOR. 4. MEENA, MANGALATHUCHIRA HOUSE, LAKSHAMVEED COLONY, THOTTAPPUZHA, ERAVIPEROOR. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 4310 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners are accused Nos.2,1,3 and 4 in Crime No.686 of 2009 of Thiruvalla Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 323, 326 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners 3 and 4 were deleted from the party array and, therefore, they are not accused persons in the case. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The wound certificate would disclose that the de facto complainant sustained serious injuries. The allegation is that the accused persons used chopper and sword sticks for commission of the offence. B.A. NO. 4310 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations levelled against the petitioners, I am of the view that the petitioners are not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If petitioners 1 and 2 are granted anticipatory bail, it would adversely affect the smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/