IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6602 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.250/2009 OF CHAKKARAKKAL POLICE STATION, KANNUR PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED -------------------- PRASAD C, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIKANNAN K.V., KODI VALAPPIL HOUSE, MACHERY, MOUVANCHERY P.O., CHELORE AMSOM, KANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAKKARACKAL POLICE STATION, THALASSERY. 2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6602 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of November, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.250 of 2009 of Chakkarakkal Police Station, Kannur District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326, 447 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The date of occurrence was on 1.9.2009. The de facto complainant sustained severe injuries. The allegation is that the accused persons attacked him with deadly weapons. It is also revealed that the attack was due to political rivalry. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is nothing to connect the petitioner with the offence and that the case was foisted against him due to political rivalry. Prima facie, there are materials to connect the petitioner with the offence. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the BA No.6602/2009 2 case, the nature of the injuries and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. The petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would affect the proper investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl