IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 26TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5708 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.335/08 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 & 2 ----------------------------------------- 1. SUDHEER, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. PLUS, MINIVILASAM, PADAPPAKKARA P.O PERAYAM CHERRY, MULAVANA VILLAGE,KOLLAM. 2. SAJI, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. CHARLES KOCHUPOYYEL MELATHIL, PADAPPAKKARA P.O. PERAYAM CHERRY, MULAVANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNDARA POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HICH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 5708 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th September, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 341, 324 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. According to prosecution, accused 1 and 2 assaulted the de facto complainant with a sword and iron rod and he sustained injuries. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioners are innocent of the allegations made and they are falsely implicated by the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant gave a detailed statement, based on which the crime is registered in this case under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 327 read with 149 of Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. Seven accused were allegedly involved in the crime originally. Overt acts were also attributed to each of them and many of them were allegedly using iron rod to assault the de facto complainant. The 7th accused allegedly kicked him also. Detailed description of the incident is given in the First Information Statement, as per which even an unlawful assembly was formed. 4. However, during the investigation, it was found that almost all the allegations made by the de facto complainant are false and BA.5708/08 2 hence, only two persons are retained in the array of accused and those are the petitioners who are now implicated as accused 1 and 2. The various sections under which the crime was registered were deleted, as well as other accused. On the basis of a complaint lodged by a person, who deviated from his earlier statement to a very great extent, are likely to be harassed, it is submitted. The petitioners apprehend arrest in a non-bailable offence and they are prepared to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and co- operate with the investigation, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners are required for the purpose of recovery of weapon and hence, anticipatory bail may not be granted. On hearing both sides and taking into consideration the striking deviation made by the de facto complainant from the First Information Statement given, I find that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners, on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: i) Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer and subject themselves to interrogation and co-operate with the investigation. BA.5708/08 3 ii) Thereafter, in the event of their arrest, they shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, on condition that they shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed and they shall co-operate with the investigation. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.