High Court Kerala High Court

Biju vs State Of Kerala on 25 May, 2010

Kerala High Court
Biju vs State Of Kerala on 25 May, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 2737 of 2010()


1. BIJU, AGED 36 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. MANI, AGED 41 YEARS,
3. BIJU, AGED 41 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :25/05/2010

 O R D E R
                                K.HEMA, J.
                         -------------------------------
                        B.A.NO. 2737 OF 2010
                -------------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010.

                                   ORDER

This petition for Anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offence under Sections 143, 144, 147,

148, 307, 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

According to prosecution, while the defacto complainant was

proceeding in a motor cycle the petitioners (A2, A1 and A3) along

with other accused formed into an unlawful assembly, wrongfully

restrained the defacto complainant and assaulted him using iron

rod, choppers etc. and thereby inflicted injuries and attempted to

commit murder. The incident happened on 10.4.2010.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that there was an

altercation between two rival groups. The first petitioner is Vice

President of District Youth Congress Committee and the defacto

complainant is a worker of CPI. They were having enmity towards

each other. The 1st and 3rd accused are closely related to the 2nd

accused. The defacto complainant attacked petitioners and first

accused sustained injury in the incident and he was hospitalized

also. The information given to the Doctor was that the injury was

sustained in fall apprehending that if a medico legal case is

disclosed, he will be put to difficulties.

B.A.NO. 2737 OF 2010
2

4. This petition is opposed. Learned counsel for defacto

complainant submitted that the defacto complainant was attacked

9 days prior to his marriage. Weapons were used and injuries

were inflicted on defacto complainant. He was hospitalized for four

days.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this application and

submitted that five crimes are registered against first accused and

three crimes are registered against second accused. Proceedings

under Section 107 of Cr.P.C are also initiated against them. The

defacto complainant sustained injury using choppers and iron rods.

The weapons are to be recovered.

6. On hearing both sides, and on considering the facts and

circumstances of the case, the serious nature of the allegations

made, the stage of investigation, the need for interrogation and the

recovery of the alleged weapons of offence. I find that, this is not a

fit case to grant anticipatory bail.

This petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA,JUDGE.

pm