IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2010 / 10TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2712 of 2010() ----------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1 ------------------------------------------- ASOKAN, KALATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VALUMMEL, THOPPUMPADI, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.JOHN SEBASTIAN RALPH SRI.K.J.JOSEPH (ERNAKULAM) SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED S.I OF POLICE, THOPPUMPADI POLICE STATION ( IN CR. NO. 270/2010 OF THOPPUMPADI POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) REP. BY THED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. M.S BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sou. K. HEMA, J ---------------------- B.A.No.2712 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of May, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offeces are under sections 425, 341, 324, 323 r/w 34 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner is accused No.1 (A1) along with two others allegedly trespassed into the house of defacto complainant and wrongfully restrained defacto complainant and assaulted three persons and all of them were injured and hospitalised. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner, his wife and daughter were assaulted by defacto complainant and others and they sustained injuries and they were hospitalised. The said incident happened at 5 pm on the same day, as evidenced by FIR, annexure-A1. But, in the present case, the allegation is that it was at 5.30 pm petitioner and others trespassed into house of defacto complainant and committed the offences at 5.30 pm. But, at that time petitioner, his wife and daughter were in the hospital, as evidenced by the wound certificate and the incident happened in the petitioner's house. Therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted, it is submitted. B.A. No.2712/10 2 4. Learned public prosecutor pointed out that two crimes are registered and the incident in this case is alleged to have occurred at 5.30 pm and other incident is stated to to be at 5 pm. In both cases, injuries are sustained by three persons each and weapons are also alleged to have been used. The allegation in both cases are the assailants trespassed into the house of defacto complainant in the respective cases. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that mere registration of two crimes is not sufficient to grant anticipatory bail. It appears that due to some difference of opinion between two groups have hit each other. Petitioner has not made out any ground to grant anticipatory bail. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou.