IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 5504 of 2008()
1. SHAJ KUMAR @ SHAJI,
... Petitioner
2. SATHEESAN, S/O. DASAN,
3. THALHATH, S/O. MOHAMMED HANEEFA,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.M.N.UNNIKRISHNAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :30/09/2008
O R D E R
K. HEMA, J.
---------------------------------------------------
Bail Appl.No. 5504 of 2008
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of September, 2008.
ORDER
Petition for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under Sections 341, 323, 326
read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution,
petitioners 1 to 3, in furtherance of common intention, wrongfully
restrained the de facto complainant and assaulted him. An iron block
was used and fracture was caused to the bone below right eye.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
petitioners and de facto complainant were returning from a house
where there was some function in connection with marriage. While so,
there was some altercation between the two. Both of them were in
drunken state and nothing as alleged had taken place. Petitioners
may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted.
4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor
submitted that de facto complainant was not drunk as alleged, as
revealed from the wound certificate. There is nothing to show that he
was intoxicated or that there was smell of alcohol. He sustained
[B.A.No.5504/08] 2
fracture. Weapon was also used. Petitioners are required for
interrogation and recovery of weapon.
On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that considering the nature
of allegations made and the investigation required, it is not a fit case
to grant anticipatory bail. The incident happened as early as on
16.8.2008 and the petitioners could be not arrested so far.
Hence, petitioners are directed to surrender before
the investigating officer or before the Magistrate
court concerned within one week from today, and co-
operate with the investigation.
With this direction, the petition is dismissed.
K. HEMA, JUDGE.
Krs.