IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 4346 of 2007()
1. ABILASH, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN,
... Petitioner
2. UDAYAN @ UDAYAKUMAR, S/O. VASUDEVAN,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.ALAN PAPALI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :19/07/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A.No. 4346 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 19th day of July, 2007
O R D E R
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 2
and 12. The alleged incident took place on 8.5.2007. The incident
was really a clash between employees of the buses and the students.
The petitioners face allegations for offence punishable, inter alia,
under Section 308 I.P.C. There is a case and counter case.
Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent
arrest. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a
conference has been called by the District Collector and the disputes
have been settled.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are absolutely innocent. At any rate, it is transparently
evident that the allegation under Section 308 I.P.C. is not justified at
all. It is alleged that there was an attempt by one of the accused (not
the petitioners) to inflict an injury on the head of one of the victims
by beating with an iron rod. Fortunately the iron rod slipped and the
beating landed on other parts of the body. This is the crux of the
B.A.No. 4346 of 2007
2
allegation under Section 308 I.P.C. The learned counsel submits that a
careful reading of the wound certificate would expose the hollowness of the
allegations. Convenient allegations are raised under Section 308 I.P.C. to
unnecessarily exaggerate the gravity of the allegation. In these
circumstances directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C. may be issued in favour
of the petitioners, submits the Prosecutor.
3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. But
notwithstanding the opposition I am satisfied in the facts and circumstances
which I have already indicated that anticipatory bail can be granted to the
petitioners. I say so because all other offences are bailable offences and
there does not appear to be sufficient substratum to raise the allegation
under Section 308 I.P.C. The submission that the matter has been settled,
which is not controverted does also, weigh with me in coming to this
conclusion that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners, subject
to appropriate conditions.
4. In the result:
(1) This application is allowed.
(2) The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
(a) The petitioners shall surrender before the learned Magistrate on
26.7.2007 at 11 a.m. The learned Magistrate shall release the petitioners on
B.A.No. 4346 of 2007
3
regular bail on condition that they execute bonds for Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for
the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.
(b) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation
before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. on 27.7.07 and
28.7.2007 and thereafter on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and
12 noon for a period of two months. Subsequently they shall appear before
the Investigating Officer as and when directed by the Investigating Officer
in writing to do so.
(d) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned Magistrate as
directed in clause (1) above, these directions shall lapse on 26.7.06 and the
police shall be at liberty thereafter to arrest the petitioners and deal with
them in accordance with law.
(b) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender on
26.7.2006 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be released from
custody on their executing bonds for Rs.25,000/- each without any surety
undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 26.7.2007.
(R. BASANT)
tm Judge
B.A.No. 4346 of 2007
4
\