IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 617 of 2008()
1. SANTHOSH @ MAMMOOTTI, S/O.DAMODARAN,
... Petitioner
2. SAJIKUMAR @ SWAMY, S/O.VIVEKANANDAN,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.G.P.SHINOD
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :05/02/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
B.A.No.617 of 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of February, 2008
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused 1
and 2. Altogether there are only 2 accused persons. They face
allegations in a crime for offences punishable, inter alia, under
Sections 308 and 323 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations against
the petitioners is that they, on account of prior animosity,
allegedly attacked the victim with dangerous weapons, including
a Kambipara. Bleeding injury was suffered on the nose. Other
injuries were also suffered. While the victim was proceeding in an
autorickshaw, the petitioners, allegedly went on a motorcycle,
obstructed the autorickshaw, pulled the victim out of the
autorickshaw and allegedly indulged in the overt act. The alleged
incident took place on 12.10.07. The victim was seen by the
doctor later on the same day. The crime was registered on
13.10.07. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend
imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are absolutely innocent. Allegations are raised
B.A.No.617 of 2008 2
vexatiously. Inclusion of the allegation under Section 308 I.P.C
clearly declares the mala fide intention of the defacto
complainant and the willingness of the police to oblige the defacto
complainant. There are no circumstances justifying the allegation
under Section 308 I.P.C, it is submitted. The learned counsel for
the petitioners brings to my notice that not even an allegation
under Section 324 I.P.C is specifically raised.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the
application. The learned Public Prosecutor only submits that
subject to appropriate conditions which shall ensure the interests
of a fair, efficient and expeditious investigation, the petitioners
may be granted anticipatory bail.
4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am
persuaded to agree that direction under Section 438 Cr.P.C can
be issued in favour of the petitioners. Even though there is an
allegation that iron pipe was used for infliction of the injury, no
specific circumstances to corroborate the said allegation at
present is shown. I do take note of the submission of the learned
counsel for the petitioners that it is not disputed by the learned
Public Prosecutor that there is no allegation raised even now
under Section 324 I.P.C. Nature of the injury suffered has been
B.A.No.617 of 2008 3
read over to me from the wound certificates. I am satisfied that
subject to appropriate conditions, anticipatory bail can be granted
to the petitioners.
5. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The
following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
i) The petitioners shall appear before the learned
Magistrate at 11 a.m on 12.02.08. They shall be enlarged on
regular bail on their executing bonds for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like
sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate;
ii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for
interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and
4 p.m on 13.02.08 and 14.02.08. During this period, the
Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to interrogate the
petitioners in custody and take all necessary steps the proper
conduct of the investigation. Thereafter the petitioners shall
make themselves available for interrogation before the
Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 12 noon on all Mondays
and Fridays for a period of 2 months and subsequently as and
when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so;
B.A.No.617 of 2008 4
iii) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned
Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall
thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to
arrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law
as if those directions were not issued at all;
iv) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender
on 12.02.08 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be
released from custody on their executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty thousand only) each without any sureties
undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 12.02.08.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-
