IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2010 / 30TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7766 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.741 OF 2009 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS. 2,3,4 ------------------------------------------------- 1. RENJITH.R., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.RAJAN, RESIDING AT 'RAJEEVAM' UCHAKKADA, PAYATTIVILA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SREEKUMAR.T., AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. SASI, PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, PAYYATTIVILA.P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. JAYASHANKAR.J.P., AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. JAYACHANDRA BABY, 'SAHNKARI BHAVAN,' PAYYATTIVILA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.741 OF 2009 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.7766 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.3, 5 and 6 in Crime No.741 of 2009 of Nemom Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 326 and 120B read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 26.9.2009, at 9.15 P.M., the de facto complainant, while riding on a motor bike along with another person, was stopped by two persons. They spilled chilly powder in the eyes of the de facto complainant and his friend. One Giri, who is known to the de facto complainant, and seven other persons attacked the de facto complainant and his friend. The de facto complainant sustained grievous injuries including two fractures. It is alleged that the de facto complainant was working in a Pharmacy of one Dr.Ajith. Later, the de fato complainant left the service of Dr.Ajith and joined as BA No.7766/2009 2 Manager in another Pharmacy. According to the prosecution, Giri and his associates were hired by Dr.Ajith, and the de facto complainant was attacked and injuries was caused to him as requested by Dr.Ajith. 4. The facts and circumstances, prima facie, shows that this is a case where a goonda gang was engaged by a person to attack the de facto complainant. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, the injuries sustained and the allegations made against the petitioners, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be required during investigation. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl