IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2009 / 25TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3867 of 2009 CRIME NO.236 OF 2009 OF ENATHU POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3 ----------------------------------------------- 1. R.ANILKUMAR, S/O.RAGHAVAN, NAMBOONAZHIKATH VADAKKETHIL HOUSE, MANNADIKALAYIKKU PADINJARU MURI, KADAMBANADU VILLAGE, ADOOR. 2. BINU.K., S/O.KUNJAYYAPPAN, BINUBHAVANAM, THUVAYOOR SOUTH, KADAMBANAD VILLAGE, ADOOR. 3. SURESH.K, S/O.KOCHUCHERUKKAN, KOLLETHUNDIL HOUSE, CHOORAKKODU MURI, ERATH VILLAGE, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.BABU CHERUKARA SRI.ANZAR BASHEER RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERATH POLICE STATION, (VIA) ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 3867 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th July, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. According to the petitioners, they are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.236 of 2009 of Enathu Police Station. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the third petitioner is not an accused person and that petitioners 1 and 2 are accused Nos.1 and 2 in the crime. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 353 and 332 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (2)(e) of PDPP Act. 3. The gist of the prosecution allegation is as follows: The de facto complainant is the driver of a KSRTC bus. The bus was being plied from Kollam to Pathanamthitta. While the bus was returning from Pathanamthitta to Kollam, at the place of incident, the bus driven by the first accused was put in such a way that the KSRTC bus could not be taken. The de facto complainant requested the first accused to remove the bus causing obstruction to the movement of the KSRTC bus. At that B.A. NO. 3867 OF 2009 :: 2 :: time, the accused persons took iron lever and attacked the de facto complainant. He sustained injuries. The electronic vending machine in the bus was also got damaged, resulting in loss to the Government. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioners are not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/