IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2008 / 3RD ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3956 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.316/08 OF VAIKOM POLICE STATION PETITIONER : ACCUSED ------------------------ KISHORE KUMAR, S/O.OMANA, PUTHEN KAYAL VEETTIL,KUDAVECHUR KARAYIL, VECHUR VILLAGE, VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 3956 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of June, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 308 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, the petitioner criminally trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and assaulted him with an iron bar. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the defacto complainant was engaged in sale of illicit liquor from his building situated on the river bank at 20 meters away from the petitioner's house. This was objected to by the petitioner and his family members and infuriated by this, the defacto complainant went to the house of the petitioner and there was an altercation, in which the petitioner as well as the defacto complainant sustained some injuries. A complaint was given by the petitioner, but no crime was registered. Thereafter, he filed a private complaint and it was sent for investigation and a crime was registered as Crime No.365 of 2008 against the defacto complainant. It is submitted that this crime is only a counter blast to the complaint made by the petitioner. The defacto complainant is the aggressor, it is BA.3956/08 2 submitted. Learned counsel for petitioner also pointed out that the version before the doctor and in the complaint are different. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes this petition and submits that the incident occurred in the defacto complainant's property. It is also submitted that the defacto complainant sustained an injury on the head and an iron bar was used by the petitioner. The defacto complainant was taken to a hospital and he was referred to Medical College Hospital. He has sustained a serious injury and the iron bar is to be recovered and the petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. 5. On hearing both sides, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail on the facts of this case. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.