IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2008 / 19TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4383 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 274/2008 OF RANNY POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2: ------------------------------------ 1. THAMPI.T.N,S/O.KUNJUKUTTY, THADATHIL HOUSE, ANGADY VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. SREEJITH, S/O.GOPI, THADATHIL HOUSE, ANGADY VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM SAMSON RESPONDENT: STATE ------------------ THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AREACODE POLICE STATION-THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 4383 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of July, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 447, 323, 324 and 326 read with section 34 IPC . According to the prosecution, the petitioners trespassed into the property of the defacto-complainant, assaulted him by using stick and stones and when one lady intervened, she was also assaulted and both of them got injured. Grievous injury was sustained by the intervenor, who lost her teeth. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations are false. The petitioners are residents of the colony situated in 75 cents of property. In connection with cremation of a dead body, there was some dispute and some incident happened at the spur of the moment and there is no intentional act, it is submitted. 4. This application is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the defacto-complainant sustained serious injury due to the act of the petitioners. Weapons are also used and those are not recovered. BA 4383/08 -2- The interrogation of the petitioners is required for the purpose of investigation. 5. On hearing both sides I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, especially since the petitioners are required for interrogation and recovery of weapons. The application is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.