IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 7TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 16TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6513 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.1231/08 OF KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- MR.SHARAFUDHEEN, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.POOKOYA THANGAL, MOOLIYILAKATHU, NORTH PALAYOOR, CHAVAKKAD P.O BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SUDHEENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.I. OF POLICE, KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No.6513 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 308 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner was driving a Maruti van in a rash and negligent manner and it hit against an auto rickshaw. On seeing the manner in which the van was driven, the de facto complainant who was travelling on a motorcycle parked the vehicle by the side of the road. Thereafter, he proceeded further while petitioner chased him in Maruti van and caused the vehicle to hit against motorcycle and caused injury to him. The pillion rider sustained fracture to the leg. The intention was to commit culpable homicide. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that First Information Statement did not disclose that petitioner committed the offence with any motive. It is only stated therein that petitioner had reversed the vehicle and asked de facto complainant why he had parked the vehicle etc. There is no case that there was any altercation because of hitting against an auto rickshaw etc. It is only a case of accident and petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. It is also submitted that after the incident, petitioner was assaulted and he sustained injuries as evidenced by Annexure A1 and thereafter a false case is foisted against petitioner. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that case diary reveals a clear case of motivated attack on the de facto complainant by chasing in a Maruti van and hitting motorcycle in which de facto complainant was travelling. The pillion BA.6513/08 2 rider sustained a fracture in the incident and it is seen from the First Information Statement itself that the Maruti van hit against an auto rickshaw. FIR is not an encyclopedia of facts and only the bare facts need be stated therein. The further details can be ascertained during investigation by questioning the witnesses. On the facts and circumstances, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that in the nature of allegations made, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The crime was registered as early as on 29.9.2008 and petitioner is not available for arrest or investigation. Petitioner is directed to surrender before investigating officer without delay and co-operate with the investigation. Whether petitioner surrenders or not, the police is at liberty to arrest him at any time. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.