IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2010 / 18TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1707 of 2010() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.509/2009 OF THE THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION) PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- PRABHAKARAN,AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.DHAMODHARAN,PARAKKAL HOUSE,KOOVERI AMSOM, MANGARA,CHAPPRAPADAVU,KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT RESPONDENT(S): STATE & COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION,KANNUR(THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM). PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. V.TEK CHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J ----------------------- B.A No.1707 OF 2010 -------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of June 2010 ORDER This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 321, 323, 324 and 326 IPC. According to prosecution, on 27/08/2010 at about 10:30 P.M petitioner attacked de facto complainant who is his brother-in- law with a chopper and caused grievous hurt to him. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner also sustained injuries and the incident happened in the house of the petitioner. Petitioner is not involved in any other crime. The matter is settled between the parties. Hence, anticipatory bail may be granted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that this is the second application for anticipatory bail. As per Annexure A2 order, the earlier application was dismissed stating that petitioner is not entitled to the relief. Recovery of weapon is not so far effected. 5. On hearing both sides and on going through Annexure A2 order, I find that the earlier application for anticipatory bail by the petitioner was dismissed about six months back on 28/01/2010. The incident happened on 27/08/2009 about ten months back. Investigation is in a stand still since petitioner has not surrendered B.A No.1707 OF 2010 2 and recovery of weapons is not effected. In Annexure A2 order, this court has already observed that if anticipatory bail is granted to petitioner it would adversely affect the proper investigation of this case and that custodial interrogation of petitioner may be required. It was also observed that petitioner is not entitled to discretionary relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence and the allegations made against the petitioner, i do not find any reason to come to a different finding. Though petitioner submitted that the matter is settled, there is nothig before this court to support the same. Though petitioner would contend that the injury sustained by de facto complainant is minor, learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the offence involved is under Section 326 IPC and injuries are also serious. Taking into account various facts, the following order is passed: (1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer forthwith and co-operate with investigation. (2) No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner shall be entertained by this court. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA JUDGE vdv