This is an application filed by the petitioner, who are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.783 of 2014 of Ayiroor Police Station for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The case of the prosecution in nut shell was that on 24.08.2014 at about 04.30 p.m. the accused persons formed themselves in an unlawful assembly with deadly weapons with an intention to commit culpable homicide attacked the de facto complainant and others and caused injury to them and thereby all of them have committed the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 308 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence and they are innocent of the same and they have been falsely implicated in the case. In fact the de facto complainant and others who belong to DHRM party came to the house of the petitioners and attacked them and caused injuries to them and in respect of that incident another crime was registered as Crime No.784 of 2014 of the Ayiroor Police Station under Sections 354, 143, 147, 323, 324, 308 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code against the de facto complainant and others, and in that case they were granted bail. So it is a counterblast to that crime that the present crime has been registered. so he prayed for allowing the application.
4. The application was opposed by the Public Prosecutor on the ground that in the connected case, the accused persons were arrested and thereafter they were released on bail. So it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail.
5. Heard both sides and perused the case diary file.
6. It is seen from the case diary file that the above crime was registered against the present petitioners and other identifiable persons alleging commission of the above said offences on the basis of the statement given by the de facto complainant. It is also in a way admitted that in respect of the same incident another crime was registered as Crime No.784 of 2014 on the basis of the statement given by 4th accused herein against the de facto complainant in this case and others alleging commission of the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 308 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that in the other case accused persons were arrested and thereafter they were released on bail.
So considering the fact that there are case and counter cases registered in respect of the same incident, this court feels that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. So they can very well surrender either before the investigating officer or before the concerned court. So the petitioners are not entitled to get anticipatory bail. The application is liable to be rejected.
In the result, this application is rejected.
Sd/-
K.RAMAKRISHNAN.
JUDGE.
AS /True Copy/ P.A. to Judge