High Court Kerala High Court

Binu Vadakkekoottu vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 13 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
Binu Vadakkekoottu vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 13 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 6034 of 2008()


1. BINU VADAKKEKOOTTU, S/O.VARGHESE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. VINOD VADAKKKEKOOTTU, S/O.VARGHESE,
3. SHINOY,  DO.
4. THOMAS SEBASTIAN, S/O.SEBASTIAN, DO.

                        Vs



1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KELAKAM
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE REP; BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.CIBI THOMAS

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :13/11/2008

 O R D E R
                            K.HEMA, J.
                 ---------------------------------------------
                        B.A.No.6034 of 2008
                 ---------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 13th November, 2008


                               O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147,

148, 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 IPC. According to

prosecution, on 24.8.2008, at about 6.30 p.m., petitioners

(accused nos.1 to 4) and another accused formed into an

unlawful assembly and armed with deadly weapons, assaulted

the defacto complainant and he sustained injuries. The accused

used knife for the offence.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that on the

same day, defacto complainant and others were actually

attacking petitioners and they sustained injuries at the hands of

defacto complainant and others. For commission of the offence,

chopper was used by the defacto complainant and first accused

sustained an incised wound 10×2 cm. on the scalp with profuse

bleeding, behind the left ear. Second accused sustained

contusion on left knee and left eye lid. They were hospitalised

and on the statement given by one of the accused, crime

BA No. 6034 /2008 2

no.206/08 was registered against defacto complainant.

4. However, on knowing that the crime is registered

against defacto complainant, he gave a statement exaggerating

the incident. He has alleged that the accused committed the

offence with intention to commit culpable homicide. But, the

only injury sustained by the defacto complainant on an alleged

attack made on him by five persons armed with deadly weapons

is small superficial lacerated wound over abdomen. It is

submitted that it is unlikely that such wound will be caused by

the use of a knife as alleged. On the other hand, the first

accused sustained a considerable long injury inflicted by a

chopper and the allegations made by the accused is more

probable, it is submitted. The defacto complainant is the

aggressor and hence, petitioner may be granted anticipatory

bail, it is submitted. It is also submitted that the defacto

complainant had enmity towards petitioners, who are brothers,

since the defaco complainant’s brother was abused by the first

accused. It was as a retaliation that he had attacked the

petitioners in the manner alleged in crime no.206/08, it is

submitted.

BA No. 6034 /2008 3

5. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor

submitted that the allegations made in this case are serious in

nature. A1 and A2 both used knives and the defacto complainant

was injured also. There were five persons on the side of

petitioners and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail

especially since the knives are to be recovered. Only if

petitioners are interrogated, the recovery of weapon can be

effected, it is submitted. It is also submitted by learned public

prosecutor that the accused could not be taken into custody by

the police after the arrest of the first accused from his house. He

was rescued and in connection with the said incident, crime

no.208/08 was registered.

6. On hearing both sides and on an evaluation of the

facts and circumstances of the case and documents produced

relating to the injury sustained, I am satisfied that petitioners

can be granted anticipatory bail. Petitioners are prepared to

abide by any condition and co-operate with investigation.

Therefore, the following order is passed:

Petitioners shall surrender before the Magistrate

Court concerned and they shall be released on bail

BA No. 6034 /2008 4

on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two

solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction

of the learned Magistrate on the following

conditions :

(i) Petitioners shall report before the Investigating

Officer on every Sunday between 10 a.m. to 1

p.m., within two days of their release on bail and

co-operate with investigation and make

themselves available for interrogation.

(ii) Petitioners shall not influence or intimidate any

witness or commit any offence while on bail.

The petition is allowed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE
csl