IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7263 of 2008(A) ------------------------------------- CRIME NO.605/2008 OF BALUSSERY POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 6 : ---------------------------------------- 1. SUBEESH @SUBASH, S/O.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 26 YEARS, KAPPIKUNNUMMAL HOUSE, PINDAMNEEKKIYIL, KANNADIPOYIL, BALUSSERY, KOYILANDY TALUK. 2. BIJU P.N, S/O.GOPI, AGED 32 YEARS, PINDAMNEEKKIYIL, KANNADIPOYIL, BALUSSERY, KOYILANDY TALUK, 3. MUTHU @ ANOOP, S/O.ANANDAN, AGED 30 YRS, KAPPIKUNNUMMAL HOUSE, KANNADIPOYIL, BALUSSERY, KOYILANDY TALUK. 4. SHALU, S/O.RAVI, AGED 28 YEARS, BALUSSERY, KOYI MANCHOLAKKAL HOUSE, KANNADIPOYIL, KOYILANDY TALUK. 5. SHOBI, S/O.ASOKAN, AGED 23 YEARS, MANCHOLAKKAL HOUSE, KANNADIPOYIL, BALUSSERY, KOYILANDY TALUK. 6. SUMESH, S/O.SUNDARAN, AGED 22 YEARS, MANCHOLAKKAL HOUSE, KANNADIPOYIL, BALUSSERY, KOYILANDY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR Bail Appl..No. 7263 of 2008(A) RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BALUSSERY POLICE STATION, BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.01.2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.7263 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 323, 324 and 149 of I.P.C. According to prosecution, the petitioners formed into an unlawful assembly and went to the house of the defacto complainant and assaulted the defacto complainant and his wife with iron rod etc. and caused fracture to the head of the defacto complainant's wife. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that no incident as alleged had taken place and the defacto complainant and his wife did not sustain any injuries, as alleged. It is submitted that the defacto complainant and his brother in laws came to the house of first petitioner and assaulted first petitioner and the other inmates of the house. There was a dispute between defacto complainant and his sister (who is the mother of the first accused) relating to a property. After assaulting first accused and his family members, defacto complainant and brother in laws were B.A.No.7263 of 2008 2 proceeding in a vehicle and an accident occurred and injuries were sustained. Utilising those injuries this case is falsely foisted, since first accused had lodged a complaint against the defacto complainant and brother in laws for trespassing into his house and assaulting them, it is submitted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this bail application and contended that first accused used to abuse defacto complainant and his wife and hence, brothers of the wife of the defacto complainant came to the house and they wanted to stop this harassment. Accordingly, they went to the house of defacto complainant and told him to convey this to the first accused and stating this, the defacto complainant's brother in laws took away the defacto complainant's wife in a vehicle. On seeing this, first accused and others pelted stones to the vehicle and the driver lost control and accident occurred. But, it is not correct to say that the allegations made in this case are absolutely false. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides and on considering the nature of the allegations made and the nature of investigation required, B.A.No.7263 of 2008 3 I am satisfied that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Though the petitioners put forward a specific case, there are only bare assertions and there are no supporting materials. Petitioners are directed to surrender before the Magistrate court concerned or the police and co-operate with the investigation. Whether they surrender or not, arrest would proceed in accordance with law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac