IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 3RD ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5828 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.274/08 OF RANNI POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED --------------------------------- THAMPI.T.N., S/O.KUNJUKUTTY, THADATHIL HOUSE, ANGADI VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.BIJI MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): STATE & COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. S.I. OF POLICE, RANNI POLICE STATION PATHANAMTHITTA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5828 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 427, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner who is the 5th accused along with other accused in furtherance of common intention allegedly trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and assaulted him and in the incident, grievous injury was sustained by the defacto complainant's brother-in-law who had come to the scene. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's name was not mentioned in the FI statement lodged by the defacto complainant, though petitioner and the defacto complainant are known to each other since a very long time, they are office bearers of one “Sabha”. But, petitioner is subsequently implicated as a 5th accused in the crime, on an after-thought. Petitioner is not involved in the offence at all. 4. Learned public prosecutor submitted that as per the BA No.5828/08 2 allegations not only the defacto complainant but, his brother-in- law and sister had also come to the scene and they were also attacked. But, the fact that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are known to each other is admitted. It is also conceded that the petitioner is not required for recovery of weapon. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that the petitioner was not implicated as per the FIS, but, he was brought into the array subsequently and he is not required for recovery and therefore, the following order is passed: Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court within seven days from today and if bail application is filed, he shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions: (i) Petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when directed. (ii) Petitioner shall co-operate with the BA No.5828/08 3 investigation. (iii) Petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl