IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2008 / 27TH SRAVANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3962 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.283/08 OF CHADAYAMANGALM POLICE STATION PETITIONER : PETITIONER --------------------------- K.KOCHUMMEN, AGED 63, S/O. C.KUNCHANDI P.K.HOUSE, VAYAKAL P.O.VAYAKAL, VALAKOM, KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 3962 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th August, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 308 of Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, the petitioner assaulted the victim using a knife and inflicted stab injuries on him. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is aged 63 years and he is not even able to walk. The victim is his relative and there was some property dispute and there was a push and pull between them. Nothing took place as alleged. Petitioner was hospitalised, as evidenced by Annexure-I. The said medical certificate is issued from the Medical Centre Hospital and it shows that the petitioner was a staff of the said Hospital and was admitted in the hospital from 16.5.2008 to 30.5.2008 due to injuries and body pain. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that there is a counter case also registered on the basis of the statement given by the petitioner. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the victim sustained two stab injuries in the abdomen of considerable nature as evidenced by the wound BA.3962/08 2 certificate. He was treated as an inpatient from 16.5.2008 to 30.5.2008. The case diary reveals a direct attack by petitioner on the de facto complainant. 5. On hearing both sides and on going through the records, I find that there is no document to show the nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner. It is also not clear from the document produced whether the injuries, if any, sustained by the petitioner had any connection with any alleged assault made by the victim in this case on the de facto complainant on the date of occurrence. No document is produced to show whether any counter case is filed. 6. The nature of allegations made in the counter case is also not before this Court. The knife is not recovered and the petitioner will be required for interrogation and recovery of weapon allegedly used for the offence. Taking all these facts into consideration, there is nothing to reveal that de facto complainant was the aggressor and that petitioner acted in private defence. The de facto complainant had incised wounds on his body which is unexplained. I do not find that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.