IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 3056 of 2009()
1. GIREESH,S/O.GEETHA,AGED 22 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SUB INSPECTOR OF
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :11/06/2009
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------
B.A. No. 3056 of 2009
------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of June, 2009
O R D E R
This is an application for anticipatory bail under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is
the first accused in Crime No.81/2009 of Kuzhalmannam Police
Station, Palakkad.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under
Sections 324, 506(ii), 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. The petitioner filed an application for anticipatory bail
before the Sessions Court, which was dismissed on 18/04/2009,
on the ground that investigation was in progress and the police
had to recover weapons of the offence. Thereafter, the petitioner
filed another Bail Application under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure before the Sessions Court, which was
dismissed as per Annexure A order dated 15/05/2009. Thereafter
the petitioner has filed this Bail Application before this Court. The
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that anticipatory bail
was granted to the accused Nos.2 and 3 by the learned Sessions
B.A. No. 3056 / 2009
2
Judge on 18/04/2009.
4. I have gone through the case diary. Overt acts
alleged against accused Nos. 2 and 3 are different from those
alleged against the first accused. On that ground the learned
Sessions Judge granted anticipatory bail to accused Nos. 2 and 3.
The allegation is that the petitioner has used an iron rod for the
commission of the offence, whereby the defacto complainant has
sustained fracture on the left ulna.
5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the
case, the nature of the offence, the injuries sustained and the
weapons allegedly used by the petitioner (first accused), I am not
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE
scm