IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4688 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.520/2009 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- 1. PRAVEEN, NEDIYIRUPPIL HOUSE, KAZHIMBRAM BEACH, VALAPPAD. 2. UDHAYAN @ UDHAYAKUMAR, NEDIYIRUPPIL HOUSE, KAZHIMBRAM BEACH, VALAPPAD. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT/STATE: ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.520 OF 2009 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION). SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.4688 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.520/2009 of Valappad Police Station, Thrissur. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 8/7/2009, the accused persons, on account of rivalry towards the defacto complainant due to discontinuance of the friendly relationship with the accused persons, attacked him and inflicted injuries on him with a knife and a stick. The defacto complainant sustained serious injuries. 4. The injuries noted in the wound certificate are : “Sutured wound 10 cm traversely below umbilicus, Fracture in the 4th and 5th Metacarpal of the left hand.” 5. The prosecution case is that the first accused used a B.A. No.4688/2009 2 knife and a stick for the commission of the offence. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the first accused is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. However, the case of the second accused stands on a different footing. Therefore, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the second accused. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the second petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.15,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The second petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The second petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The second petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The second petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. B.A. No.4688/2009 3 E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is dismissed in so far as the first petitioner/first accused is concerned and allowed in the manner indicated above in so far as it relates to the second petitioner/second accused. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm