IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 2963 of 2010()
1. SHIHAS, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.KUNJAPPAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.A.GEORGE JOSEPH
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :25/05/2010
O R D E R
K.HEMA, J.
-------------------------------
B.A.NO. 2963 OF 2010
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the25th day of May, 2010.
ORDER
This petition for Anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offence is under Sections 294(b) and 308 of
Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner stabbed
defacto complainant twice with a knife and inflicted injuries due to
enmity. According to defacto complainant, petitioner had spoken
indecently about his wife to the neighbours.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is a
Civil dispute between the petitioner and his brother. There is also a
counter case in respect of the present incident and petitioner
sustained injuries. The incident happened in the house where both
of them are residing. The petitioner tried to grab his father’s
property. No serious injury is sustained by the petitioner. A
reading of the FI Statement itself will show that this is a false case,
it is submitted.
4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public
Prosecutor submitted that this is a case where the petitioner
inflicted injury on his brother with a knife and nature of the injury is
serious, as per the statement of the doctor. The wound certificate
B.A.NO. 2963 OF 2010
2
also shows that there are two injuries on the left auxiliary region. The
motive for the crime is that the petitioner was spreading rumour in the
neighbour hood about the petitioner’s wife. This is not a fit case to
grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted.
5. On hearing both sides, I find that though assertions are
made that there is a counter case is also and the petitioner sustained
injuries etc, there is nothing to support this bare assertion or about a
counter case. Even otherwise, mere existence of counter by itself is
not a sufficient to grant anticipatory bail. Considering the seriousness
of the allegations made and the nature of the injury inflicted on
defacto complainant who is none other than the petitioner’s own
brother, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory
bail to the petitioner.
This petition is dismissed.
K.HEMA,JUDGE.
pm