IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2010 / 18TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3094 of 2010() -------------------------------------- CMP.740/2010 of DISTRICT COURT, KALPETTA. CRIME NO.291/2010 OF KALPETTA POLICE STATION, WAYANAD .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- BASHEER,AGED 39 YEARS,S/O.IBRAHIM, ELANGOLI HOUSE,MADAKKIMALA POST, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REP;BY SHO,KALPETTA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J ---------------------- B.A.No.3094 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 326 and 308 of IPC. According to prosecution, on 2.5.2010 at about 9 am petitioner attacked defacto complainant with a chopper and he sustained serious injuries including a fracture. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the incident happened in petitioner's house. There is no explanation why the defacto complainant had came to petitioner's house. Even as per FI statement defacto complainant and petitioner are not in good terms and petitioner was on inimical terms with defacto complainant. Petitioner is a heart patient as revealed from wound certificate, annexure-2, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor submitted that investigation reveals that petitioner is residing in the 'Tharavadu' house. Defacto complainant is petitioner's brother, who admittedly, used to visit the house occasionally. On B.A. No.3094/10 2 the date of occurrence, he had made a visit and petitioner's wife has even provided food for him and he had his food from petitioner's house. Thereafter, the brothers quarreled and incident happened. In this incident, petitioner had used a chopper and caused injury. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Learned public prosecutor however, submitted that weapon is already recovered. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the serious nature of allegations made, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Regarding the circumstances, under which defacto complainant happen to be in the petitioner's house is explained by public prosecutor with reference to the statement in the case diary. 6. Petitioner is at liberty to appear before the investigating officer or learned Magistrate. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou.