High CourtsSingle Bench

Ajo Thomas vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 7 October 2022 · Citation: (2022) 10 KL CK 0045

HON’BLE JUDGES
Viju Abraham, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294(b), 308, 323, 324, 341, 452
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 3271, 3623 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 358 words

Viju Abraham, J

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

2.

In BA No.3271/2021, the petitioner is the second accused and in BA No.3623/2021, the petitioner is the first accused in Crime No. 272 of 2021 of the Mala Police Station, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 452, 341, 323, 324, 308, 294(b) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The prosecution allegation is that, on 14/4/2021 at about 4.40 PM, due to prior enmity that the petitioner’s mother was denied treatment by the defacto complainant, the petitioner along with other accused had trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant assaulted him by fisting and attacking by a wooden reaper. Defacto complainant sustained injury on his head including 7 stitches and thereby the accused have committed the aforesaid offences.

4.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they have not committed any offences alleged against them and they are totally innocent of the charges levelled against them.

6.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for bail mainly contending that the defacto complainant  was  attacked  with  a  wooden  reeper  and  he sustained serious injuries on his head and further that the petitioners destroyed his epuipments in the clinic also. The defacto complainant was attacked by a wooden reeper by the second accused and that the first accused is involved in four other criminal cases. A practicing doctor has been attacked and his clinic was destroyed. He also sustained serious injury. Such attack on doctors who was discharging his duties cannot be considered lightly. Considering the seriousness of the allegations and the criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. I dispose of the anticipatory bail application with the following directions:

Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer and after interrogation, they shall be produced before the Jurisdictional Magistrate on the very same day and if the petitioners move an application for bail with advance copy to the learned Public Prosecutor, the bail application shall be considered by the Jurisdictional Magistrate, preferably on the very same day.