IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2008 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7047 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.599/08 OF VARKALA POLICE STATION PETITIONER 1ST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ S.BASHEER, S/O.SHAMSUDEEN, NAZEERA MANZIL, KALLAYIMUKKU, MUTTAPPALAM, POOVANKAL, NADAYARA, VARKALA. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARKALA POLICE STATION, VARKALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/12/2008, ALONG WITH BA NO. 7048 OF 2008 BA NO. 7050 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 7047 of 2008, B.A.No.7048 OF 2008 & B.A.NO.7050 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd December, 2008 O R D E R These petitions are for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioner in B.A.No.7047 of 2008 is first accused, petitioner in B.A.No.7048 of 2008 is fourth accused and petitioner in B.A.No.7050 of 2008 is fifth accused. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioners (accused 1, 4 and 5), along with accused 2 and 3 formed into an unlawful assembly and assaulted de facto complainant with a soda bottle etc. and a fracture to the nasal bone was inflicted on him on 7.10.2008 at about 7.15 PM. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the only person who inflicted injury with a weapon on de facto complainant is the first accused. As against other accused, there are only allegations of fisting, beating etc. with hands. It is submitted that de facto complainant is an anti-social element and a goonda in the locality. He is now undergoing imprisonment in connection with BA.7047,7048 & 7050/08 2 robbery case. He assaulted a relative of petitioners and petitioners were acting only in exercise of their self defence and petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that this is a case where soda bottle was used and a fracture was caused to de facto complainant and all the accused have taken part in the incident. De facto complainant sustained a fracture to the nasal bone, but none of the accused have sustained any injuries. No counter case is also registered. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners, considering the nature of allegations made and the nature of investigation required. A mere counter allegation is not sufficient to rant anticipatory bail. The crime was registered as early as on 7.10.2008 and petitioners are not available for interrogation. Petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer without any delay and co- operate with the investigation. Whether petitioners surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them at any time and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, petitions are dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.