IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2560 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.313/2010 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. (S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 TO 6: ---------------------------------------------- 1. ANIMON,S/O.,TERRANCE, MANKKARA VEEDEU,VALATHUNGAL CHERRY, ERVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 2. SHIHAN, S/O.SHIHANI, VALIYAZHIKATHU VEEDU, AKKOLIL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE,KOLLAM. 3. SHIYAD, S/O.ISMAIL KUNJU, VELIYIL VEEDU, AKKOLIL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 4. RIYAZ,S/O.ABDUL RAHIM,MADATHARA, AKKOLIL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 5. FAIZAL, S/O.SAINALBDEEN, NOWFAL MANZIL,AKKOLIL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 6. NOWFAL, S/O.SAINALBDEEN, NOWFAL MANZIL, AKKOLIL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,ERAVIPURAM POLICE, STATION KOLLAM DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.2560 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 19th July, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioners(accused nos.1 to 6) formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and assaulted defacto complainant on 16.3.2010 at about 10.30 a.m., by using sword, stick etc. and inflicted injuries on him and committed the various offences stated above. The incident happened in the festival ground near a temple. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that in respect of the same incident which occurred on the same day, at the same place, three crimes are registered, including this crime. Crime No.299/10 was registered against defacto complainant in this case and others. Crime No.300/10 was registered against petitioners and others and some of the accused were granted anticipatory bail in that case, as per order dated 27.5.2010. Hence, petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is BA NO. 2560/10 2 submitted. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that it is true that three crimes were registered on the same day. In the present case, defacto complainant sustained injuries at the hands of petitioners. Stick and sword were used for inflicting injuries on him. Crime No.299/10 was registered on the basis of a complaint made by an injured. However, the crime in which the anticipatory bail was granted, offence under Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code was the main offence. The complaint in that case was lodged by the President of the festival committee, stating that articles in the temple premises were damaged by the accused. 5. There is no ground to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners. They are required for the purpose of custodial interrogation and recovery of the weapons. It is also pointed out that petitioners 1 and 2 are accused nos.1 and 2, but third accused in the crime is already arrested. It is further pointed out that it cannot be confirmed at this stage whether petitioners 3 to 6 are involved in this case or not. The investigation is going on. The persons who are actually involved in the crime have to be BA NO. 2560/10 3 identified by the witnesses. 6. On hearing both sides, I find that the allegations made against petitioners 1 and 2 are serious in nature. The defacto complainant and another person had sustained injuries. Multiple lacerated wounds were inflicted on the scalp, eye lid etc. Another person also sustained lacerated wounds of considerable nature, in the incident. The swords and sticks, which were used for the offences are to be recovered, for which custodial interrogation of petitioners will be necessary. 7. The mere registration of three crimes, in respect of an incident which occurred in the same place by itself, cannot be made a ground to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioners 1 and 2 have not made out any ground to get anticipatory bail. They are bound to surrender and co-operate with the investigation. The incident happened as early as on 16.3.2010. But, it appears that other petitioners cannot be proceeded against at this stage, since the identity of accused is to be confirmed though witnesses. Hence, the following order is passed : (1) Accused nos.1 and 2 shall surrender before the Investigating Officer without any delay and co- BA NO. 2560/10 4 operate with the investigation. (2) No further application for anticipatory bail by accused nos.1 and 2 in this crime will be entertained by this Court hereafter. (3) Since petitioners 3 to 6 are not confirmed to be the accused in this case, anticipatory bail cannot be granted to them, as there is no basis for apprehension of arrest. The prayer for anticipatory bail by petitioners 3 to 6 is rejected. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs