IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 30TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 395 of 2009() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.989/2008 OF CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2 --------------------------------------------- 1. BABU, AGED 42, S/O.THOMAS, PULLOCKARAN HOUSE, KANAKAMALA DESOM, KODAKARA, TRISSUR. 2. BAIJU, S/O.THOMAS, PULLOCKARAN HOUSE, KANAKAMALA DESOM, KODAKARA, TRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 395 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 19th day of February, 2009 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 341, 323, 324, 326, 354, 294(b) and 506(ii) read with section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioners (A1 and A2) along with three accused, in furtherance of common intention, trespassed into the compound of de facto complainant, wrongfully restrained de facto complainant and her husband and assaulted them using stone and de facto complainant's husband sustained a fracture. They also molested de facto complainant, abused her in obscene language and also criminally intimidated both of them. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that on the same day petitioners' mother who is 3rd accused was assaulted by de facto complainant and her husband and she sustained injuries in the incident. A crime was also registered. The injury sustained by de facto complainant's husband is not due to any act committed by petitioners. He fell down and sustained injury. Learned counsel for petitioners also submitted that the injuries allegedly sustained by de facto complainant and husband are by BA 395/2009 -2- pelting stones. Petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there is a specific allegation that de facto complainant's husband sustained fracture by hitting with stone. The injuries were caused not merely by pelting stones. De facto complainant's husband was hit with stone and compound fracture is caused to his four ribs. Petitioners' involvement is also mentioned in the First Information Statement itself. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am of the view that mere filing of a counter case may not be sufficient to invoke provision under section 438 Cr.P.C. Considering the serious nature of allegations made, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners. Petitioners are bound to surrender and co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the following order is passed:- 1) Petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer without any delay and co- operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. BA 395/2009 -3- 2) No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this Court, since on the facts in this case, this Court ordered that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail and any order to the contrary in any subsequent anticipatory bail application will amount to review, which is impermissible in law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.