IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6855 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.497/2008 OF ADIMALI POLICE STATION) PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- V M ALIYAR, S/O.MUHAMMED, AGED 35 YEARS, VETTIKKAD VEEDU, ADIMALI.P.O, ADIMALI. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADIMALI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl.No. 6855 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of November, 2008. ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 294(b) and 353 of IPC. According to prosecution, on 20.10.2008 at about 2.50 p.m. petitioner went to the police station and abused the police constable and pulled down the case diary and committed various offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner's friend's motor bike was intercepted by the police and R.C. Particulars were not available with him. Hence he called petitioner to the police station and asked him to collect R.C. from the agent and hand it over to Sub Inspector at the Police Station. Accordingly, he collected the same and went to the police station and explained to the Head Constable who was at the reception that he wanted to hand over the document to the Sub Inspector . [B.A.No.6855/08] 2 But the Head Constable abused him in obscene language and told him whether he would see only the Sub Inspector and also stated that the police station was ruled by people like him. 4. Thereafter, he and another constable assaulted. He sustained injuries and he was hospitalised. Though doctor sent intimation to the police, no statement was recorded from petitioner. Petitioner sent a representation to Human Rights Commission as Annexure A3 stating his grievances in the matter. It is only to defend the police officials from the action being taken against them that a complaint is lodged against petitioner by the Head Constable alleging that he committed offences against de facto complainant. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, as per the materials in the case diary, petitioner had gone to the police station and insisted the Head Constable, who was in the station, that he must peruse the documents which he brought, since the Sub Inspector was not available. When he refused to do so, he pulled down the case diary and used criminal force and thereby committed the offences. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the circumstances to which crime is registered against petitioner, I find that it is only [B.A.No.6855/08] 3 just and proper that anticipatory bail is granted to petitioner. Hence, the following order is passed: Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate court concerned within 7 days from today. 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 the following conditions: i) Petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation and co-operate with the investigation. ii) Petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. Petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.