IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6500 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 443/2008 OF KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION PETITIONER/5TH ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ JUBY AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. VEDAVYASAN, PLAVILA VEEDU, PORUNTHAMON, PULIMATH P.O. BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.SAIJO HASSAN RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6500 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 506 (ii), 323, 324, 308 IPC and section 27 of the Arms Act. According to prosecution, petitioner (A4) along with 18 others formed into an unlawful assembly and assaulted de facto complainant and another by using weapons like chopper, sword, etc. Both of them sustained injuries. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the incident is an off shoot of political rivalry. Offence under under section 308 is included only with a view to harass petitioner. If an incident had happened as alleged in the First Information Statement, more serious injuries could be expected. At least, some grievous injury or fracture would be caused. But, no grievous injury is sustained and in the above circumstances, petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that two persons were injured in the incident. Both of BA 6500/08 -2- them sustained cut injuries on the temporal and parietal regions. Lacerated wound at the parietal region was also caused to de facto complainant. The allegations are serious in nature and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that petitioner who is 4th accused used an iron rod for commission of Of fence. Iron rod is not recovered and petitioner is required for recovery of weapon used. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that in the nature of allegations made, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioner has not made out any materials to indicate his innocence. Petitioner is required for interrogation and recovery of weapon, which is allegedly used by him. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. The incident happened as early as on 5-10-2008 and petitioner has not appeared and co- operate with the investigation or surrender before the court and hence the investigation is at stand still. Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Magistrate court concerned or before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation without delay. Whether he surrenders or BA 6500/08 -3- not, police is at liberty to arrest him at any time. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.