IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 635 of 2010()
1. VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.SEKHARAN,
... Petitioner
2. BOSE, S/O.VIJAYAKUMAR,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.B.HARI NARAYANAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :03/03/2010
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------
B.A. No. 635 of 2010
-----------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2010
O R D E R
This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438
of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused
Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No.349/2009 of Kongad Police Station,
Palakkad.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under
Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 294(b) and 307 read with
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The petitioners moved for anticipatory bail before the
Sessions Court, Palakkad, which was dismissed as per the order
dated 27/01/2010. By the order dated 11/01/2010 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Palakkad, anticipatory bail was
granted to accused Nos. 3 to 5.
4. The de facto complainant is the younger brother of
the first accused. The second accused is the son of the first
accused. The prosecution case is that on 25/12/2009 at
6.15 A.M, the accused persons formed themselves into an
unlawful assembly, forcibly entered into the residential
B.A. No. 635 /2010
2
compound of the de facto complainant armed with deadly
weapons and attacked him and caused injuries to him. The
de facto complainant was taken to a hospital at Palakkad and on
their advice, he was taken to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore. The
Accident Register cum wound certificate maintained by K.G.
Hospital, Coimbatore discloses eight injuries on different parts of
the body of the de facto complainant. The injuries include several
cut injuries.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
the first accused had also sustained injuries due to an attack
made by the de facto complainant and that the de facto
complainant is the aggressor. While disposing of this Bail
Application, it is not necessary to arrive at a conclusion as to who
was the aggressor.
6. The injuries sustained by the de facto complainant are
serious in nature. Dangerous weapons were allegedly used for
the commission of the offence. In spite of the fact that the
de facto complainant and the first accused are brothers, in the
facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the
B.A. No. 635 /2010
3
petitioners are not entitled to the discretionary relief under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If anticipatory
bail is granted to the petitioners, it would adversely affect the
proper investigation of the case.
For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE
scm