IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 23RD APRIL 2010 / 3RD VAISAKHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2252 of 2010 ----------------------------- CRIME NO.772/2010 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DIST. ............. PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ---------------------------- 1. GEEVAGHESE, AGED 46, S/O. DANIEL, KANNANKARA KIZHAKKETHIL, BIJU BHAVAN, PUTHUR MURI, PUTHOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK. 2. BIJU DANIEL, AGED 37, S/O. DANIEL, KANNANKARA KIZHAKKETHIL, BIJU BHAVAN, PUTHUR MURI, PUTHOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK. 3. K. DANIEL, AGED 76, S/O. KORUTHY KOCHUMMEN, KANNANKARA KIZHAKKETHIL, BIJU BHAVAN, PUTHUR MURI, PUTHOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (REPRESENTING THE CIRLCE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION) BY PUBLIC PROSECTUOR, SRI. NOBLE MATHEW THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.2252 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of April, 2010 O R D E R This is an anticipatory bail application filed by the accused in Crime No.772/2010 of Kottarakkara Police Station, Kollam District under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 2. The allegation against the petitioners/accused who are the father and sons is that on 05.04.2010 at about 9.30 p.m., the accused manhandled the defacto complainant and caused injuries to him and thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 447, 323, 326, 294(b) and 34 of IPC. 3. It is alleged in the petition that on 28.03.2010 at about 11 p.m. the defacto complainant and others manhandled the petitioners for which a case has been registered as Crime No.745/2010 by the Kottarakkara Police and this case has been registered on 05.04.2010, that the present case is falsely foisted against the petitioners and they apprehend arrest and harassment by the police and therefore anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. BA No. 2252 of 2010 -:2:- 4. Notice given to the Public Prosecutor. Heard counsel for the petitioner and Public Prosecutor. 5. For the following reasons I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. There is case and counter case with regard to the same incident. Accused also suffered injuries in the incident. Therefore, the apprehension of the petitioners regarding the arrest and harassment at the hands of the police appears to be true. Therefore, I feel that this is a fit case in which anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. 6. In the result, the petition is allowed. The respondent is directed to release the petitioners on bail if arrested, on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only)each with two solvent sureties for like sum each. If arrested and released on bail, the petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating officer as and when ordered. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, Judge ttb