IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2011 / 7TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6015 of 2011 CRIME NO.867 OF 2011 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. PETITIONERS: ACCUSED 1-3 ------------------------------- 1. SUBEESH, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.SUKUMARAN, PANIKKASSERY HOUSE, P.O.CHEMMANNOOR, ARTHAT VILLAGE, THRISSUR. 2. SUBEESH, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.SANKARAN, VALAYAMKULANGARA HOUSE, P.O.CHEMMANNOOR, ARTHAT VILLAGE, THRISSUR. 3. BAIJU, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.KUMARAN, CHERUPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O.CHEMMANNOOR, ARTHAT VILLAGE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING SI OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, KUNNAMKULAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-680503. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 6015 OF 2011 B ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of July, 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.867 of 2011 of Kunnamkulam Police Station, Thrissur District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 326 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 4.7.2011, the de facto complainant was attacked by the accused from the bus stand. The local people intervened and pacified them. However, while the de facto complainant was going to his house, the accused persons came on a motor bike and accused No.3 hit on the nose of the de facto complainant with a punching block. The de facto complainant sustained fracture on nasal bone. 4. In the nature of the allegations levelled against the third BAIL APPL. NO. 6015 OF 2011 :: 2 :: accused, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him. However, the avert acts alleged against accused Nos.1 and 2 have not resulted in grievous hurt. In the facts and circumstances, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to accused Nos.1 and 2. 5. Therefore, there will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.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) The petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.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) The petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) The petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; BAIL APPL. NO. 6015 OF 2011 :: 3 :: 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 the third petitioner/third accused and it is allowed in the manner indicated above in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/