IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 2498 of 2010()
1. SREERAG, RESIDING AT PULLUR,
... Petitioner
2. REGESH, RESIDING PULLUR, HOSDURG TALUK,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SMT.P.K.PRIYA
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :27/07/2010
O R D E R
K.HEMA, J
-----------------------
B.A No.2498 OF 2010
--------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of July 2010
ORDER
This petition is for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under Sections 452, 341, 323 r/w
34 IPC. According to prosecution, on 20/03/2010, at about 9 a.m,
petitioners (A1 and A2), in furtherance of common intention,
committed house trespass into the house of de facto complainant,
wrongfully restrained him and assaulted him.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that de facto
complainant’s brother and others attacked petitioners herein at a
place lying within the limits of Bakel police station and a crime was
registered as crime No.199/2010 against de facto complainant and
his brother who are gundas. No offence under Section 452 will be
attracted in this case, since allegations to attract the said offence
are missing in the FIS and documents. The said offence is included
only for refusing bail to petitioner, it is submitted. The only non-
bailable offence is under Section 452 IPC, it is submitted.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as per the
allegations in the complaint, petitioners had trespassed into the
house of de facto complainant and the incident happened inside
the house. It is true that the only non-bailable offence alleged in
this case is under Section 452 IPC.
B.A No.2498 OF 2010 2
5. On hearing both sides, I did not think that petitioner
has made out any ground for getting anticipatory bail. Only
because the de facto complainant or his brother attacked
petitioners within the limits of any police station, anticipatory
bail cannot be granted. However, it appears that petitioner has
a strong and arguable case in respect of involvement of Section
452 IPC. Hence the following order is passed.
(1) Petitioners shall surrender before the
Investigating Officer within 7 days from today
and co-operate with investigation.
(2) On such surrender, if the petitioners are
arrested, offence involved in this case will be
treated as one under Section 448 IPC instead of
Section 452 IPC.
Petition is disposed of accordingly.
K.HEMA
JUDGE
vdv