N. Arun Raj vs State Of Kerala on 6 November, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 5420 of 2008()


1. N. ARUN RAJ,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL)

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :06/11/2008

 O R D E R
                             K.HEMA, J.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                         B.A.No.5420 of 2008
                  ---------------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 6th November, 2008


                                O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

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

148, 149, 341, 323 and 308 IPC. According to prosecution,

defacto complainant along with his son were going to his house

while petitioner along with other accused formed into an

unlawful assembly and wrongfully restrained him, assaulted him

and committed various offences in prosecution of common object

of unlawful assembly. Wooden sticks were used by the accused

and defacto complainant sustained serious injuries on his head.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that this

is a falsely foisted case based on political enmity, petitioner

being a sympathiser of rival political party of the ruling party. It

is his case that offence under Section 308 IPC will not be

attracted.

4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor

submitted that in the nature of allegations made, it is not a

fit case to grant anticipatory bail. It is also pointed out that

BA No.5420/2008 2

co-accused in this case also had filed a petition for anticipatory

bail, but, it was dismissed by this Court.

5. On considering the contentions raised and the

seriousness of the allegations made, I am satisfied that it is not a

fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The incident occurred as early

as on 2.8.2008 and petitioner was not available for investigation.

Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the

Magistrate Court concerned or the Investigating

Officer and co-operate with the investigation without

delay. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at

liberty to arrest him at any time.

With this direction, this petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE
csl