IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8060 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.435/2011 OF KANJIRAMKULAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 7 : ------------------------------- 1. VINEETH, S/O. VASU, KANNINPUTHEN VEEDU, KAZHIVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VINOD, S/O. VASU, KANNINPUTHEN VEEDU, KAZHIVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ARAVIND @ SHAMBHU, S/O. VASANTHAN, AGED 20 YEARS, KALLIL PUTHEN VEEDU, KAZHIVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SYAM G., AGED 19 YEARS, PLAVILA VEEDU, KAZHIVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SREEJITH S., CHILANTHIYADI VEEDU, SREEBHAVAN, KAZHIVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. KANNAN, MUDAKATHANVILAKATHU VEEDU, KAZHIVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. SARATH, S/O. MAYA, AGED 16 YEARS, PLAVILAVEEDU, KAZHIVOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY SRI.MARTINDAS V.JAMES (VATTAKKUZHIYIL) B.A.No.8060/2011 RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/10/2011, THE COURT ON 03/11/2011 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.8060 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 03rd day of November, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 7 in Crime No.435 of 2011 of Kanjiramkulam Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation is that on 10/09/2011, the de facto complainant and others were attacked by the accused and they caused serious injuries to the de facto complainant and others. The accused used weapons like fisting block and sticks. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have also perused the case diary. 5. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, Bail Appln.No.8060/2011 : 2 : I do not think that the petitioners are entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj