IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2010 / 16TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2509 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.323/10 OF CHAVARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. (S): PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. SHUKKOOR M., AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED KUNJU, MUPPATTIYIL HOUSE, NOW RESIDING AT PILLAVEETTIL THEKKETHIL HOUSE, CHOLAYIL MURI, MUKUNDAPURAM VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. NAWAS A., AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL RAHMAN KUNJU, MUPPATTIYIL HOUSE, KOLAM MURI, PANMANA VILLAGE. 3. NAJEEM A., AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL RAHMAN KUNJU, MUPPATTIYIL HOUSE, KOLAM MURI, PANMANA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI (VENNELA) SRI.ABHILASH AKBAR SRI.T.B.SIVAPRASAD SMT.SUMEY CHANDRAN SRI.V.S.PREJITH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY S.I. OF POLICE, CHAVARA POLICE STATION, CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT (THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM). PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.2509 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 7th July, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioners(Accused nos.2, 3 and 4) along with few others formed themselves into an unlawful assembly on account of previous enmity and assaulted defacto complainant's son by using iron rod and wooden logs and inflicted injuries on him and thereby committed various offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that this is a falsely foisted case against petitioners due to previous enmity. Petitioners have not committed any offence. Even according to prosecution, only first accused used weapon. Petitioners were not armed with weapons. The injuries sustained by the alleged victim are not serious. The offence under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code will not be attracted in this case. It is also submitted that first accused is already granted bail. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners also submitted that if anticipatory bail is rejected, direction may be given to the BA NO.2509/10 2 learned Magistrate to consider the bail application, if any filed by petitioners, on the same day. It is also submitted that a direction may be given to the learned Magistrate that if bail cannot be granted on the same day, interim bail application may be considered. The request made by petitioners cannot be allowed since legally, this Court cannot issue any such directions as prayed for. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioners are not correct. This is a case where all the petitioners used weapons. The 2nd accused used iron rod and 3rd and 4th accused used wooden logs to inflict injury on the defacto complainant's son. He sustained serious injuries including several fractures of the rib and also other injuries on the body. He had depressed fracture on the scalp involving parietal bone. Both the defacto complainant as well as his son are injured in the incident. The wound certificate reveals that the injured sustained very serious injuries. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioners are required for custodial interrogation and recovery of the weapons used for the offences. 6. On hearing both sides and on going through the BA NO.2509/10 3 case diary, particularly the wound certificate, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioners are required for custodial interrogation and recovery of weapons. Very serious injuries are sustained by defacto complainant's son. Granting of regular bail to first accused is not a ground to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners. The incident happened as early as on 11.3.2010 and petitioners are bound to surrender and co- operate with the investigation. Hence, the following order is passed : (1) Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer without any delay and co-operate with the investigation. (2) No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioners in this crime will be entertained by this court hereafter. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs