IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 7TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 7297 of 2011 CRIME NO.231 OF 2011 OF RAMANKARY POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONERS: ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3: ------------------------------ 1. VINCENT ANTONY @ KURUNNAPPAN, S/O.ANTONY, AGED 37 YEARS, KOCHUPARAMBU HOUSE, THEKKEKARA, MANCOMBU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. GIREESH, S/O.SIVADASAN, AGED 19 YEARS, MITHRAMADOM COLONY, MITHRAKKARY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. SYAM, S/O.SASI, AGED 24 YEARS, MITHRAMADOM COLONY, MITHRAKKARY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN SMT.T.J.SEEMA RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 7297 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of September, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.231 of 2011 of Ramankary Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 294(b), 341, 323 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 9.7.2011 at 6 P.M., the accused persons attacked the de facto complainant and he sustained injuries including a fracture. The fracture was caused as a result of the assault made by accused No.3/petitioner No.3 with a stick. The overt acts alleged against accused Nos.1 and 2/petitioners 1 and 2 did not result in any fracture. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the BAIL APPL. NO. 7297 OF 2011 :: 2 :: case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to accused No.3/petitioner No.3. If anticipatory bail is granted to accused No.3/petitioner No.3, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. 5. In so far as accused Nos.1 and 2/petitioners 1 and 2 are concerned, there is no case that the assault made by them has caused any grievous hurt to the de facto complainant. In these circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to accused Nos.1 and 2/petitioners 1 and 2. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of accused Nos.1 and 2/ petitioners 1 and 2, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rupees Ten thousand each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) Accused Nos.1 and 2/petitioners 1 and 2 shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) Accused Nos.1 and 2/petitioners 1 and 2 shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; BAIL APPL. NO. 7297 OF 2011 :: 3 :: c) Accused Nos.1 and 2/petitioners 1 and 2 shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) Accused Nos.1 and 2/petitioners 1 and 2 shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is dismissed in so far as it relates to accused No.3/petitioner No.3 and it is allowed in the manner indicated above, in so far as it relates to accused Nos.1 and 2/petitioners 1 and 2 . (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/