IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 23RD MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 525 of 2009() ---------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.162 OF 2008 OF NEYYAR DAM POLICE STATION) .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2: ---------------------------------------------- 1. BIJU ALIAS UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. VISWAMBHARAN, KIZHAKKUMKARA VEEDU, PANDIMAMPARA, PLAMPIZHINJI, MANCHENKODE P.O. 2. PRAVEESH ALIAS PRAVEEN, NEDUVILA KRISHNA VILASAM HOUSE, ANDUKODE DESOM, EDAKKAD VILLAGE,VILAVANKODE TALUK,KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, MR.K.VINODKUMAR (707/89) RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE,NEYYAR DAM POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 525 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 12th day of February, 2009 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 308, 323 read with section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, 1st accused was in love with de facto complainant's niece. On the date of occurrence on 10-10-2008 at about 8 p.m. petitioners and two others tried to take away the de facto complainant's niece from the house and there was a resistance from the family members and hence, de facto complainant was assaulted by accused. Knife was also used for stabbing de facto complainant and he sustained injuries. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that incident did not occur as alleged. Petitioners had gone and waited near the house where the girl was residing, at her request. She promised to come out at 8 p.m. and accompany the 1st accused. She was in love with the 1st accused. Believing the words of the girl, they went near the house and was waiting outside the house. In the meanwhile, the girl came out and the family members noted this, and she was resisted while there was hue and cry and de facto complainant came in between and there was a scuffle. Petitioners have not committed any offence, it is BA 525/2009 -2- submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that de facto complainant sustained serious injuries on several parts of the body. Knife was also used by the accused and the incident did not occur, as alleged by the defence. Knife is to be recovered and petitioners are required for interrogation. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the serious nature of the allegations and nature of investigation required, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Though counter allegations are made, there are only bare assertions without any supporting materials. 6. In the above circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. Crime was registered as early as on 11-10- 2008. Petitioners are bound to co-operate with the investigation and hence, the following order is passed:- 1) Petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer without any delay and co- operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. BA 525/2009 -3- 2) No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this Court, since on the facts in this case, this Court ordered that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail and any order to the contrary in any subsequent anticipatory bail application will amount to review, which is impermissible in law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.