IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2436 of 2010() ---------------------------------------- CRIME NO.166/2010 OF ARIYANKODE POLCIE STATION, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ......... PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED: --------------------------------------- BOSE PURUSHOTHAMAN @ SANAL, AGED 36 YEARS, SANAL BHAVAN, EDUKKONAM, PERINGADAVILA P.O., NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR, ARIYANKODE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 2436 of 2010 ----------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 326 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant , who is his father-in-law and assaulted him using iron rod and he sustained a fracture to the left leg and thereby committed the various offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner and his wife had filed a Writ Petition before this court against police harassment, when there was harassment by the police at the instance of the petitioner's father-in-law. In the light of the submissions made by father-in-law and other respondents that they have no intention to harm the petitioner, the Writ Petition was disposed of on 01.12.2008. The de facto complainant took away petitioner's wife and child from his house and illegally detained them in his house, against their willingness. 4. On the date of occurrence, the petitioner went to the B.A. No. 2436 / 2010 2 father-in-law's house at about 9 P.M., to take his wife and child. They came along with him. In between, some incident happened and the father-in-law tried to catch hold of the petitioner from behind and a scuffle ensued and de facto complainant fell down. But the de facto complainant filed a complaint stating that at about 1 A.M., petitioner trespassed into the house and committed the offence etc. The wife and child are still with the petitioner. 5. Petitioner requested for an opportunity to be given to appear before the investigating officer and as per the direction of this court, they appeared before the investigating officer on 02.07.2010 and he was questioned by investigating officer. Petitioner's wife had also gone to the investigating officer and she was also questioned. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner appeared before the investigating officer pursuant to the directions issued by this court and he was questioned. This petition is not opposed, it is submitted. B.A. No. 2436 / 2010 3 7. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail on the conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: 1. Petitioner shall, in the event of his arrest be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs. 25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that petitioner shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed and co-operate with the investigation. 2). This order will be in force only for a period of 20 days from today and the petitioner shall seek regular bail from the court concerned within such time. This petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln