IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2011 / 31ST SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5621 of 2011() ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN BA.4907/2011 Dated 28/06/2011 Crime No.427 of 2011 of Pathanamthitta Police Station. .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos.2 & 3 --------------------------------- 1. MITHUN, S/O.SURENDRAN, AGED 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT KALLUPURAYIDATHIL VEEDU, VARANMARUTHI, KOONAMKARA P.O., PERUNAD VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. SANOJ, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.SUSEELA SASI, KUNNUMPURATHU HOUSE, ONKKATHIL, PERUNAD VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH SRI.PRAKASH KESAVAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- 1. THE S.I. OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.5621 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.427 of 2011 of Pathanamthitta Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 324, 326 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation is that on 06/06/2011 at 9.30 P.M., the accused persons attacked the de facto complainant and his friend with stones. The friend of the de facto complainant sustained fracture of parietal bone and the de facto complainant also sustained injuries. It is further alleged that due to the attack made by the accused, the friend of the de facto complainant sustained injuries and he was being taken to the hospital. At that time, the accused persons attacked again the de facto complainant and his friend and they sustained the injuries mentioned above. Bail Appln.No.5621/2011 : 2 : 4. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioners are entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj