IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA *BAD DATE*, THE 0TH *BAD DATE* 0 / Bail Appl..No. 3869 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.176/2008 OF PATTANAKKAD POLICE STATION PETITOENR : ACCUSED ------------------------ RAHUL, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, VADAKKUMTHALA HOUSE, PATTANAKKAD P.O, CHERTHALA, ALLEPPEY. BY ADV. SMT.C.S.SHEEJA RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PATTANAKKAD POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/06/2008, THE COURT ON 19-6-2008 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 3869 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of June, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. 2. According to the prosecution, the petitioner trespassed into a toddy shop and destroyed some bottles of toddy and caused damages. He also slapped one of the employees and thereby committed offences under sections 452, 427, 323 and 506(ii) IPC. According to the prosecution, the motive is that the defacto-complainant had a quarrel with the petitioner's uncle and wreck vengeance the petitioner has acted in the manner as alleged. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that offence under section 452 is only a non-bailable offence, but it will not be attracted on the facts of this nature. The petitioner was using only his hands to slap the employee, which shows that he had not any preparation to commit the offence. It is also submitted the petitioner was having iron rod in his hand and in spite of that he did not use the same and therefore offence under section 452 is not attracted on the facts and circumstances of this case. It is also submitted that the petitioner is aged only 19 years. BA 3869/08 -2- 3. The application is opposed. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that considering the nature of offence, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that the iron rod which was used for the offence is to be recovered. 4. On hearing both sides, it is clear that there was a motive for the petitioner to commit the offence and he had gone to the shop with iron rod and committed mischief, etc. As submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, it cannot be said that an offence under section 452 is not attracted merely because the petitioner slap the defacto-complainant. I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The application is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.