IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2008 / 1ST SRAVANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4637 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO. 607/08 OF IRINJALAKUDA POLICE STATION) APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.6: ----------------- ALVIN, S/O.STANLY, CHIRAMEL HOUSE, PANGOTHARA, NELAYI VILLAGE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BYU PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SRI.K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2008, ALONG WITH B.A.NO. 4598/08 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl.Nos. 4637& 4598 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2008. ORDER Petition for bail and petition for anticipatory bail are filed by different accused in the same crime. 2. Accused no.6 filed B.A.No.4637 of 2008 for bail and accused nos. 4 and 5 filed B.A.No.4598 of 2008 or anticipatory bail. 3. The crime is registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by the de facto complainant under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 308 read with Section 149 of IPC. According to prosecution, on 20.6.2008 at about 5.30 p.m. the petitioners along with other accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and assaulted the de facto complainant using weapons. Iron rod was also used for the commission of offence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted at the outset that the 2nd accused, who allegedly used iron rod for inflicting the injury on the de facto complainant, is already released on bail by the Magistrate Court. None of the other accused have used any weapon. It is also submitted that this was actually an attack on the petitioners by the de facto complainant and his gang who are [B.A.Nos. 4598/084637/08] 2 goondas. Accused nos. 4 and 6 were seriously injured in the incident. Though they were hospitalised with extensive injuries all over the body and statements were recorded from them, no crime has been registered by the police, it is submitted. 5. The medical certificates are also produced, which will show that they had injuries on different parts of the body like lacerated wound etc. including fractures. In the case of accused no.4, there is spleen rupture also. The accused no.4 is still in the hospital and he has fracture on more than one part, it is submitted. But, as far as the de facto complainant in this case is concerned, he had sustained only one minor injury on the forehead. But. offence under Section 308 IPC is incorporated only with a view to harass the petitioners and detain them in jail, it is submitted. The 5th accused is implicated only because, he happened to be the brother of the 4th accused. The 5th accused is a student and he secured high distinction in the S.S.L.C. Examination and he is now a 5th semester B.Sc. Microbiology student. He is not involved in any other offence and in case, he is detained his entire future will be destroyed, it is submited. 5. Both the petitions are strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that considering the nature of the offence committed, petitioners may not be released on bail and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. As per the allegations, they had [B.A.Nos. 4598/084637/08] 3 allegedly gone on a motorcycle, waylaid the de facto complainant and attacked him and an iron rod was used by the 2nd accused. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that accused nos. 4 and 6 are involved in other crimes, though it is conceded that the 2nd accused is released on bail. Accused no.5 is not so far implicated in any offence. 6. On hearing both sides and on perusal of the documents, I find that petitioner in B.A.No.4637 of 2008 is in custody since 10.7.2008 onwards and the co-accused, who alone used weapon for the offence was granted bail, there is no reason why bail should be refused to accused no.6. As far as anticipatory bail application is concerned, I am satisfied that petitioners will be subjected to harassment and irreparable injuries. It is to be born in mind that though the accused sustained serious injuries on the same incident, no crime was registered on the basis allegations made by him. Hence, the following order is passed: i) Accused no.6 is granted bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate Court concerned, on condition that he will not influence or intimidate any witness or commit any offence while on bail and in case of breach of this condition, bail is liable to be cancelled. [B.A.Nos. 4598/084637/08] 4 2) Accused no.5 shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within 7 days from today and if any bail application is filed, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on condition that he will co-operate with the investigation and report before investigating officer as and when directed. 3) Accused no.4 shall be released on bail in the event of arrest on his executing a bond for for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that he will not commit any offence while on bail and in case of breach of this condition, bail is liable to be cancelled. Petitions are allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.