IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 1005 of 2008()
1. SAJEEV CHANDRAN, AGED 27, S/O.CHANDRAN,
... Petitioner
2. JERIMON, S/O.RAGHAVAN,
3. RAJAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN,
4. CHANDRAN, S/O. AYYAPPAN,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :26/02/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
B.A. No. 1005 of 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of February, 2008
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are
accused 1 to 4. The crux of the allegations is that the accused
persons in furtherance of their common intention, unleashed
an attack on the de facto complainant. Dangerous weapons
were used. Serious injuries were inflicted on the de facto
complainant. Prior animosity is the alleged motive.
Investigation is in progress. The crime was initially registered
only under Secs.324 and 323 read with Sec.34 of the IPC. All
the four petitioners are named in the F.I.R. In the course of
investigation, allegation under Sec.308 of the IPC has been
included. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners
apprehend imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
B.A. No. 1005 of 2008 -: 2 :-
the petitioners are absolutely innocent. The allegations are
untrue. At any rate, the inclusion of the allegation under
Sec.308 of the IPC is totally unjustified. That section of offence
has been included solely for the purpose of vexation and to
ensure that the petitioner continues in custody for as along a
period as possible.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.
The learned Public Prosecutor submits that there are very valid
reasons for the inclusion of the allegation under Sec.308 of the
IPC. The learned Public Prosecutor, in particular, requests the
court to peruse the wound certificate issued after the
examination of the injured. He also prays that the statement of
the Doctor, who issued the said certificate, may also be perused.
4. I have perused the same. I have perused the First
Information Statement also. I have considered the nature of the
weapons used as also the nature of the injuries which are
described in the wound certificate dated 29/1/08. At this early
stage of the investigation, I shall not embark on any detailed
discussions on merits about the acceptability of the allegations
under Sec.308 of the IPC or the credibility of the data collected
in support of such allegations. Suffice it to say that I have
carefully perused all the relevant inputs, particularly the nature
B.A. No. 1005 of 2008 -: 3 :-
of the injuries described in the wound certificate. I need only
mention that I have considered all the relevant inputs. I am
unable to agree that the inclusion of the allegation under
Sec.308 of the IPC is not justified or that the same has been
done with vexatious and mala fide intent. I have been
particularly taken through the 5 injuries described in the wound
certificate.
5. This, I am satisfied, is an eminently fit case where the
petitioners must resort to the ordinary and normal course of
appearing before the Investigating Officer or the learned
Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the
normal and usual course.
6. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with
the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the
Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seek bail,
after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of
the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass
appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge
B.A. No. 1005 of 2008 -: 4 :-