High Court Kerala High Court

Kunjumon vs The State Of Kerala on 20 May, 2010

Kerala High Court
Kunjumon vs The State Of Kerala on 20 May, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 2429 of 2010()


1. KUNJUMON, AGED 35 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.RAMANATHAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :20/05/2010

 O R D E R
                             K. HEMA, J
                         ----------------------
                      B.A.No.2429 OF 2010
                  -----------------------------------
           Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010


                              O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offences are under sections 326 and 308 IPC.

According to the prosecution on 30.3.2010 at about 9.30 pm.

petitioner attacked defacto complainant near a pathway, lying

close to the house of defacto complainant, using a knife, out of

the enemity which arose on a dispute regarding the pathway.

Defacto complainant sustained grievous hurt.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no

incident as alleged has occurred. Petitioner had allowed defacto

complainant to use pathway running through his property, but

asked him not to ride motor cycle through the property, as it will

endanger the child aged three years, who used to play in the

courtyard. Out of this enemity, defacto complainant attacked the

petitioner while he was sleeping in the courtyard in a coat with his

wife and children on the date of occurrence since it was too hot a

B.A. No.2429/10 2

day. The defacto complainant had came to the scene of

occurrence with a sword and there was a scuffle when the sword

fell down and defacto complainant happened to fall on the sword

and he sustained injury. He also submitted that incident

happened at 9 pm. and the present complaint is filed stating that

the incident happened at 9.30 pm.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this bail application

and submitted that the materials in the case diary revealed that

the incident alleged in the first information statement had taken

place. The defacto complainant sustained grievous hurt and he

was stabbed twice by the petitioner using a knife, one on the

palm and another on the scapula, by which the vein was cut.

5. On hearing both sides, I find that learned counsel fore

petitioner was not even able to state whether petitioner sustained

injury in the course of the incident, which allegedly took place,

according to his version. It would also appear from his own

submissions that petitioner was attacked at 9 pm. where the

incident in this case had taken place at 9.30 pm. It is not very

clear whether the two incidents are separate or one and the

same. No ground is made for granting anticipatory bail.

Petitioner is bound to appear before the investigating officer and

B.A. No.2429/10 3

co-operate with the investigation.

6. Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer

within 7 days from today and co-operate with the

investigation.

This petition is dismissed.

K. HEMA, JUDGE.

Sou.