High Court Kerala High Court

Geevaghese vs State Of Kerala on 23 April, 2010

Kerala High Court
Geevaghese vs State Of Kerala on 23 April, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 2252 of 2010()


1. GEEVAGHESE, AGED 46, S/O. DANIEL,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. BIJU DANIEL, AGED 37, S/O. DANIEL,
3. K. DANIEL, AGED 76,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.A.SHAJI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI

 Dated :23/04/2010

 O R D E R
                        P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J.
              ---------------------------------------------
                  Bail Application No.2252 of 2010
              ---------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 23rd day of April, 2010

                             O R D E R

This is an anticipatory bail application filed by the accused

in Crime No.772/2010 of Kottarakkara Police Station, Kollam

District under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

2. The allegation against the petitioners/accused who are

the father and sons is that on 05.04.2010 at about 9.30 p.m., the

accused manhandled the defacto complainant and caused injuries

to him and thereby committed offences punishable under

Sections 447, 323, 326, 294(b) and 34 of IPC.

3. It is alleged in the petition that on 28.03.2010 at about

11 p.m. the defacto complainant and others manhandled the

petitioners for which a case has been registered as Crime

No.745/2010 by the Kottarakkara Police and this case has been

registered on 05.04.2010, that the present case is falsely foisted

against the petitioners and they apprehend arrest and

harassment by the police and therefore anticipatory bail can be

granted to the petitioners.

BA No. 2252 of 2010
-:2:-

4. Notice given to the Public Prosecutor. Heard counsel for

the petitioner and Public Prosecutor.

5. For the following reasons I am inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioners. There is case and counter

case with regard to the same incident. Accused also suffered

injuries in the incident. Therefore, the apprehension of the

petitioners regarding the arrest and harassment at the hands of

the police appears to be true. Therefore, I feel that this is a fit

case in which anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.

6. In the result, the petition is allowed. The respondent is

directed to release the petitioners on bail if arrested, on

executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand

only)each with two solvent sureties for like sum each. If

arrested and released on bail, the petitioners shall co-operate

with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating

officer as and when ordered.

P.Q. BARKATH ALI,
Judge
ttb