IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 6897 of 2008()
1. MANIKANTAN . S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, 29 YEARS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KEALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARAYOOR POLICE
For Petitioner :SRI.JOICE GEORGE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :17/11/2008
O R D E R
K. HEMA, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A. No. 6897 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 17th day of November,2008
O R D E R
Petition for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under sections 324, 326 and
294(b) IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner assaulted de
facto complainant and another using a chopper on 24-8-2008 at
about 4 p.m.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner
sustained serious injury and he was in hospital for 60 days. But de
facto complainant sustained only a minor injury and petitioner
may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted.
4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor
submitted that while petitioner and one Desai were having a
quarrel, de facto complainant intervened. At that time, petitioner
cut de facto complainant with chopper on his face. He sustained
lacerated wound near the eye. He also sustained fracture on nasal
bone and also incised wound across the face from left to right
crossing the nose. In the nature of the allegations made, it is not
a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that the
weapons used for the offence have not been recovered so far.
Another person was also injured at the hands of petitioner.
BA 6897/08 -2-
5. On hearing both sides, I find that the allegations made
against petitioner are serious in nature. Extensive injury was
caused to de facto complainant, which includes a fracture also.
Though petitioner would allege that he was in the hospital, etc.,
no document is produced to substantiate the same. There are
only bare assertions and allegations and I am not satisfied that a
mere existence of a counter case, if any, would be sufficient to
grant anticipatory bail. I am also satisfied that weapon also has
to be recovered for which petitioner’s interrogation is essential.
The incident occurred as early as on 24-8-2008 and petitioner was
not available for interrogation.
Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender
before the Investigating Officer without any delay
and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he
surrenders or not, respondent is at liberty to arrest
him and proceed in accordance with law.
With this direction, this petition is dismissed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE.
mn.