AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Justice M. Sasidharan Nambiar
Petitioners are accused in Crime No. 51/2012 of Thiruvalla police station, registered for the offences under Sections 447, 294(b) and 324 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Subsequently on investigation, offence u/s 447 of Indian Penal Code was deleted and Section 326 of Indian Penal Code was incorporated. Apprehending arrest, petition is filed u/s 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure for anticipatory bail. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. Learned Public Prosecutor made available the case diary.
Argument of the Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners is that the prosecution case cannot be true and as the incident did not occur as claimed by the prosecution, offence u/s 447 of Indian Penal Code was deleted later and Annexure-A3 treatment records of the second petitioner would establish that he sustained injuries in the incident and as police has not registered the case, petitioners had filed a complaint before the learned Magistrate and it was sent for investigation and petitioners are prepared to abide by any condition and in the event of arrest of the petitioners, they be released on bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and made available the case diary. On perusing the case diary, considering the nature of the offences and adverse effect in granting anticipatory bail, petitioners cannot be granted anticipatory bail as sought for. Petitioners are at liberty to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. If petitioners on such surrender files an application for bail with previous notice to Assistant Public Prosecutor, learned Magistrate to pass appropriate order without delay.
Petition is disposed.