IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 285 of 2009() ---------------------------- CRMP.2901/2008 of DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM CRIME NO.479/08 OF CHINGAVANAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. ULLAS, S/O. THAMPI, AGED 28 YEARS, ANCHALASSERY HOUSE, HOUSE NO.10, S.PURAM COLONY, KURICHY, KOTTAYAM (A1) 2. RAJEEV, S/O. RAJAPPAN, AGED 21 YEARS, HOUSE, NO.34 S.PURAM COLONY, KURICHY, KOTTAYAM(A2 3. PRINCE S/O.PONNAPPAN, AGED 20 YEARS, HOUSE NO.22, S.PURAM COLONY KURICHY, KOTTAYAM(A4) BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHINGAVANAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR C.K.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 285 of 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 447, 324, 308 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioners, (accused 1, 2 and 4) along with third accused, in furtherance of common intention, trespassed into the courtyard of the house of de facto complainant and assaulted by him by using sword stick etc. and inflicted injuries to him. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent of the allegations made. The incident did not occur as alleged. On the previous day there was another incident, in which petitioners set fire to a bundle of newspapers, in which a news item was published regarding the mass conversion to Islam, when de facto complainant and his brother came there and attacked petitioners. Hence, anticipatory bail may be granted, it is submitted. BA.285/09 2 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners attacked de facto complainant, since he did not co-operate with the harthal and refused to close his shop. De facto complainant sustained as many as four lacerated wounds, two on the forehead and two on the arm. Sword stick was used and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that considering the nature of allegations made, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioners are required for recovery of weapons also, for which petitioners are required for interrogation. The crime was registered as early as on 17.11.2008. Petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer 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, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.