IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2009 / 9TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 266 of 2009 ------------------------------------ (CRIME NO. 742/08 OF NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION) ........... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 4: ------------------------------------------------ 1. RENJITH, AGED 27, S/O. SASIDHARAN, OOTTARA PUTHEN VEEDU, KAMUKINKODE, VENPAKAL DESOM, ATHIYANOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. KUTTAN @ PRAMOD, AGED 26, S/O. VIDHIYADHARAN, CHAMAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KAMUKINCODE, VENPAKAL DESOM, ATHIYANOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 3. KOCHAPPI @ RATHISH, AGED 23, S/O. SASIDHARAN, OOTTARA PUTHEN VEEDU, KAMUKINKODE, VENPAKAL DESOM, ATHIYANOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 4. PAPPAN @ SUDHEESH, AGED 24, S/O. KUTTAPPAN, KULAVARABLE HOUSE, KAMUKINCODE, VENPAKAL DESOM, ATHIYANOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANNTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.AJITH KRISHNAN. RESPONDENT: --------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. M.S. BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No.266 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 29th day of January,2009 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 341, 323, 324, 307 read with section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, while de facto complainant who is a police constable was travelling with the injured on 19-12-2008, accused 1 to 4 intercepted them and they were assaulted. Accused 1 and 2 used iron rod and 3rd accused used reaper. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that The incident occurred on 19-12-2008 at about 7.30 p.m. and on the same day at about 2 hours prior to the present incident de facto complainant and injured in this case had assaulted 1st petitioner. Thereafter, when the parties met, there was some altercation and assault. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the injured sustained several injuries, as revealed by the wound certificate and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Recovery of weapon is also to be effected. 5. On hearing both sides, on going through the case diary and particularly wound certificate and considering the nature of the investigation required, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case BA 266/09 -2- to grant anticipatory bail. Crime was registered as early as on 19- 12-2008 and petitioners are not available for interrogation. Hence, petitioners are directed to surrender before the Magistrate court concerned or before the Investigating Officer without any delay and co-operate with the investigation. Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.