AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J
This is the 2nd application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1, 3 to 5 in Crime No.801/2022 of Mayyil Police Station. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323. 324 and 326 read with 149 of the IPC.
The prosecution case in short is that on 26.11.2022 at about 7 pm, the petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, due to previous enmity, caused hurt to the defacto complainant and his friend with iron rod and thereby committed the offence.
Heard both sides and perused the case diary.
I have considered all the relevant documents at the time of hearing of the 1st bail application and found that the petitioners were not entitled for an anticipatory bail. A detailed order has been passed. It was observed in the said order that the wound certificate would show that the defacto complainant has sustained serious injuries and that there are prima facie materials to show the involvement of the petitioners in the crime.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that at the time of considering the earlier application, Annexures 3 and 4 could not be produced and the earlier order was passed without taking into consideration those documents. Annexure 3 is the mass complaint filed by the people of the locality against the defacto complainant. A perusal of Annexure 3 would show that the petitioners herein are not party to the said documents. Annexure 4 is the document which would show that the 4th petitioner has sustained injuries. It is not clear from the said document, under what circumstances he sustained the injury. Annexures 3 and 4 cannot be termed as change in circumstance so as to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. This 2nd application for bail is devoid of merits. Accordingly, it is dismissed.