IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2010 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3104 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.191/2010 OF KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 & 2 -------------------------------------------- 1. AJEESH, S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, ANI BHAVAN, KARATTE, VAMANAPURAM P.O., PULIMATH. 2. VINESH, S/O.ANANDAKRISHNAN, MAHADAVERKUNNU PUTHEN VEEDU, KARATTE, VAMANAPURAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANTS --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR FOR NARCOTIC CASES, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.3104 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 28th May, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, accused Nos.1 and 2, in furtherance of common intention voluntarily caused hurt to defacto complainant's friend, by beating. While defacto complainant intervened, first accused stabbed defacto complainant and his friend with a knife and inflicted injuries. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent of the allegations made. In fact, the defacto complainant assaulted petitioners in connection with a dispute in a festival conducted in a Siva Temple. Petitioners are innocent of the allegations made. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that first accused used a knife and it is not so far recovered and petitioners are required for interrogation. It is also pointed out that considerable injuries are sustained by the BA NO.3104/10 2 defacto complainant and his friend. 5. On hearing both sides and on going through the case diary and the wound certificate, I am satisfied that the allegations made are serious in nature. Taking into account the nature of investigation required and the need for interrogation of petitioner for recovery etc., I find that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, especially since petitioners could not probabilise that there was attack on petitioners. There is only a bare assertion from their side. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs