IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2291 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.88/10 OF KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION (S): PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. PUTHENTHARAYIL SANTHOSH,S/O.SASI, KANNADIPPARA,NADUVIL PO,CHUZHALI AMSOM, KOLATHUR DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. SANTHOSH.K.G, KADAPPUZHAYIL, KADANNAPPALLY PO, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA(SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION),REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.2291 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 20th May, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 341, 323 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, on 1.4.2010, at about 12.10 p.m., defacto complainant asked the accused for arrears of wages. First accused caught hold of him and hit him with a granite stone on his face and thereby he lost one tooth. Second accused also hit him and voluntarily caused hurt to him. Defacto complainant was also wrongfully restrained. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that first accused was beaten up by defacto complainant and he sustained injuries. Complaint was lodged and a crime is also registered in respect of the said incident. This case is falsely foisted to escape from the liability in the crime registered at the instance of first accused, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the defacto complainant suffered serious injuries BA NO.2291/10 2 by the use of granite stone by first accused. Second accused also joined him in attacking the defacto complainant. It is also submitted that in the other case, there is only an allegation of beating, but no serious injuries are sustained by the first accused. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that even if the entire allegations are accepted, two parties have attacked each other and the mere existence of a counter case is not a ground for granting anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order is passed : (i) Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation. (i) Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them and proceed against them in accordance with law. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs