IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7358 of 2009(S) ------------------------------ CRMP.1474/2009 of DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA CRIME NO.278/2009 OF PERUNAD POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- SAMUEL KUTTY PHILIP @ RAJU, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.P.V.PHILIP, EDAYAKKATTU HOUSE, VADASSERIKKARA VILLAGE & RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT / STATE: -------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE S.I OF POLICE, PERUNAD POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. M.S.BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 7358 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.278/2009 of Perunad Police Station, Pathanamthitta. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 427 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is the following: On 1/11/2009, the de facto complainant, his parents and his younger brothers came to Vadasserikara in an Autorickshaw. The Autorickshaw was parked. The father and mother of the de facto complainant went to a shop for purchasing some articles. The de facto complainant, who is aged 14 years and his two younger brothers were waiting in the Autorickshaw. At that time, the petitioner herein came to the place after having fully drunk and pulled out three children out of the Autorickshaw and attacked them brutally. B.A. No. 7358/2009 2 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE scm