High Court Kerala High Court

Shiju.I.S. vs State Of Kerala on 19 December, 2008

Kerala High Court
Shiju.I.S. vs State Of Kerala on 19 December, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 7613 of 2008()


1. SHIJU.I.S., 32 YEARS
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SHO,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.NIRMAL KUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :19/12/2008

 O R D E R
                             K. HEMA, J.

                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                      B. A. No. 7613 OF 2008
                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008

                              O R D E R

Petition for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offences are under Sections 511 OF

365, 323 and 324 r/w s.34 of IPC. According to the prosecution

on 24.10.08 A1 to A5 coming in a car abducted defacto

complainant and he was assaulted and thrown out of the vehicle.

This incident occurred, since 6th accused who was on enemical

terms with defacto complainant arranged A1 to 5 to commit

offence. Defacto complainant and 6th accused were friends but

later they fell apart because of a money transaction.

3. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that

petitioner and defacto complainant are friends, as evidenced by

annexure A2 photograph but name of the petitioner was not

mentioned in the F.I. Statement. Therefore, he may be granted

anticipatory bail, it is submitted. Learned counsel for petitioner

further submitted that offence under Section 365 of IPC will not be

attracted in this case, since there is no confinement as required

B.A.7613/08
: 2 :

under the said provision.

4. Learned public prosecution submitted that defacto

complainant was assaulted by some persons who were not known

to him and that is why their names were not mentioned in the F.I.

Statement. It was only later that he came to know that the 6th

accused was the man behind the incident. Therefore, one cannot

expect mentioning of petitioner’s name in the F.I.S.

5. On hearing both sides, considering nature of

allegations made, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to

accused. Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigation

Officer and co-operate with investigation.

The petition is dismissed.

(K. HEMA, JUDGE)

KMD