IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2010 / 2ND ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2632 of 2010() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.378/2008 OF ADIMALI POLICE STATION) PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED ------------------------------ BABU KURIAKOSE, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.KURIAKOSE, KOKOZHAYIL VEETIL, THOUSAND ACRE, VELLATHOOVAL, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SMT.V.SHYLAJA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, REP. BY S.I. OF POLICE, ADIMALI POLICE STATION. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADIMALI POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J ----------------------- B.A No.2632 OF 2010 -------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of June 2010 ORDER This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 120B, 307 and 34 of IPC. According to prosecution, accused numbers 2 to 5, in furtherance of common intention, assaulted de facto complainant on 02/08/2008 at about 2 p.m and inflicted injuries on him by using granite piece. It is further alleged that petitioner hatched a criminal conspiracy with accused numbers 2 to 5 and pursuant to such conspiracy, the offences were committed. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was working as a Head Master in a school in Nagaland on the date of occurrence on 02/08/2008. Annexure C is the certificate issued from the school and it shows that petitioner was attending school on the alleged date of occurrence. It is also submitted that petitioner's name is not mentioned in FIS. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that case diary reveals serious allegations are made against petitioner. He is the person behind the commission of offence. He is the person who had arranged money for the accused who committed the offences at the scene. The phone call details were taken by police and it is seen from such details B.A No.2632 OF 2010 2 that petitioner and his wife were making frequent calls to second accused before the incident and after the incident. Case Diary reveals sufficient materials to connect accused with the crime, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the serious nature of the allegations made, I find that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. As per Annexure C, petitioner is stated to have been attending Sunday service on 02/08/2010. The plea of malibi may not be quite relevant, since prosecution has no case that petitioner was present at the scene on the date of occurrence. The allegations made against petitioner are under Section 120B and according to police, sufficient materials are collected to connect him with the offence of conspiracy. Offence allegedly is committed as early as in 2008 and two years have elapsed. Petitioner is bound to surrender and co-operate with investigation. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA JUDGE vdv