IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 702 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.71/08 OF MALAPPURAM POLICE STATION : PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1: ----------------------------------------- SAIDALI, S/O. MUHAMMED, PUTHIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERIMBALAM,MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS: STATE: ------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM POLICE STATION - THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.702 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner is the 1st accused. Altogether there are 9 accused. The 8 others are not identified so far. The crux of the allegations is that on account of prior animosity, the petitioner allegedly inflicted injuries on the defacto complainant by beating him with an areca stick. The defacto complainant's bus had met with an accident. 2 persons had succumbed to the injuries so suffered. There was a demand that the defacto complainant should pay amounts to the legal heirs of the deceased. The petitioner was one of those who took the initiative for such settlement talks. The petitioner's request were not heeded to by the defacto complainant. On account of that animosity, the petitioner is alleged to have indulged in the culpable conduct of assault on the victim. The victim has suffered 2 lacerated injuries. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. Vexatious allegations are now being raised against the petitioner. The inclusion of the allegation under Section 308 I.P.C is not at any rate justified. The inclusion of the B.A.No.702 of 2008 2 said section betrays the yearning of the defacto complainant to vex and harass the petitioner and the willingness of the investigator to oblige him. In any view of the matter the petitioner does not deserve to endure the trauma of arrest and detention on such allegations. The petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor was requested to explain the injury suffered and also the reason why Section 308 I.P.C has been included. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application for anticipatory bail. The nature of injury suffered has been read over to me from the wound certificate. I am satisfied that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail in these circumstances. 4. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11 a.m on 14.02.2008. He shall be enlarged on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate; ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and B.A.No.702 of 2008 3 5 p.m on 15.02.2008 and 16.02.2008. During this period, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps the proper conduct of the investigation. Thereafter the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 12 noon on all Mondays and Fridays for a period of two months and subsequently as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so; iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if those directions were not issued at all; iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 14.02.08 as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released from custody on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 14.02.08. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-