High Court Kerala High Court

George vs State Of Kerala on 23 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
George vs State Of Kerala on 23 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 368 of 2008()


1. GEORGE, AGED 61, S/O. JOSEPH,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :23/01/2008

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                     B.A.No. 368 of 2008
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2008

                               O R D E R

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces

allegations in a crime registered under Sections 326 and 427

I.P.C. He is the sole accused. The defacto complainant is a

neighbour of the petitioner. The defacto complainant was

allegedly assaulted on account of ill-will and animosity which

arose from a prior dispute between them. The allegation is that

the petitioner had caused fracture of the rib by hitting the victim

with a dangerous stone. Crime has been registered.

Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent

arrest.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner initially submits

that no offence under Section 326 I.P.C. would lie in as much as

no grievous hurt has been suffered by the victim. But the records

clearly show that fracture of the 6th rib has been caused. The

counsel contends that the weapon used cannot be said to be a

B.A.No. 368 of 2008
2

dangerous weapon. I am unable to agree. I am satisfied, in these

circumstances, that there is merit in the opposition by the learned

Prosecutor. The petitioner must be directed to resort to the ordinary

and normal course of appearing before the Investigating Officer or the

learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the

usual course, submits the Prosecutor.

3. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however

hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned

Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to

the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must

proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and

expeditiously.

(R. BASANT)
Judge

tm