IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2008 / 3RD MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 371 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 22/08 OF MANANTHAVADY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- T.A.MOHANAN, S/O. APPUKUTTAN, THOTTUNGAL HOUSE, PAYYAMPILLY P.O., MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD. BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNA PRASAD. S RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT/STATE ------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANANTHAVADY POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 371 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 452, 324 and 308 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that on account of prior animosity the petitioner had arranged, schemed and organised an attack on the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant and the petitioner, though friends earlier, had some animus at the relevant time. The petitioner allegedly came to the house of the defacto complainant along with some others. In the night two persons, who came along with the petitioner, who were not known to the defacto complainant, allegedly knocked at his doors. When he opened the door they said that they need water to be filled in the radiator of the vehicle. The defacto complainant offered to take a bucket and hand it over to them so that they can draw water from the tap in the road. At that time the petitioner allegedly hit the defacto B.A.No. 371 of 2008 2 complainant with a dangerous weapon on his head resulting in injures on him. The alleged incident took place on 11.1.2008. The F.I.R. was registered on 12.1.2008. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. Totally false and vexatious allegations are being raised against him. In any view of the matter, inclusion of Section 308 I.P.C. is without any merit or basis. Similarly, counsel further argues that inclusion of the offence under Section 452 I.P.C. is not justified. The counsel relies on the statement in the wound certificate, which suggests that the incident took place in the road in front of the house. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that all the available indications point to the complicity of the petitioner. At this stage there is no reason to doubt the statements of the witnesses. At any rate, the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail at this stage, submits the learned Prosecutor. B.A.No. 371 of 2008 3 4. A counsel on behalf of the defacto complainant has also wanted to make his submissions. He only supports the submissions of the learned Prosecutor. 5. I have perused the wound certificate as also the F.I. statement. My attention has been drawn to the subsequent report filed incorporating Section 308 I.P.C. On an anxious consideration of all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the contention of the petitioner that allegation under Section 308 I.P.C. has been included subsequently without sufficient justification. I do not intend to express any final opinion on the disputed facts. Suffice it to say that I am not persuaded to agree that any direction under Section 438 Cr.P.C. can or need be issued at this stage. In so far as the offence under Section 452 I.P.C. is concerned, the petitioner must, I agree with the Prosecutor, surrender before the learned Magistrate or the Investigating Officer and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. But there can be a direction to the learned Magistrate that the learned Magistrate must consider the application for bail on merits and expeditiously ignoring the allegation raised under Section 308 I.P.C. B.A.No. 371 of 2008 4 6. With the above observations this application is dismissed. 7. Hand over the order. (R. BASANT) Judge tm