JUDGMENT/ORDER

M G Uma, J. - The petitioners-accused Nos. 1 to 5 are before this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.96/2022 of Antarasanthe Police Station, Mysuru District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148,324, 307, 448,427,504,506, 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Sri Lokesha.

2. Heard Sri Lethif B, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri K. Rahul Rai, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the materials on record.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 5. They are innocent and law abiding citizens. They have not committed any offences as alleged. They have been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. There is reasonable apprehension of being arrested and therefore, petitioners are before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the informant lodged the first information alleging the commission of offence by these petitioners. It is specifically stated that accused No.1 assaulted on his head with machete and damaged the jeep, motor cycle and CC TV Camera. The wound certificate relating to the informant discloses that he has not sustained any injury on the head. But he has sustained dislocation of his right shoulder, for which he has been treated and discharged on 29-12-2022. Under such circumstances petitioners are not required for interrogation.

5. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners and informant are neighbours. In respect of the incident that had taken place, accused No.4 filed the first information against the informant and other family members which was registered in Crime No.97/2022. Two of them are injured in the incident. The petitioners are not having any criminal antecedents. The petitioners are the permanent residents of the addresses mentioned in the cause title to the petition and are ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition in the interest of justice.

6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioners for having committed the offences. They are absconding since the date of registration of the case. The informant has sustained head injury and dis-location of the right shoulder. The petitioners are absconding since from the date of commission of the offence. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the informant, petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail. If the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, they may never turn up before the Investigating Officer and they may abscond or may commit similar offences, threaten or tamper the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

7. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

'Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.?'

My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following:

REASONS

8. Injured informant lodged the first information making specific allegations. It is stated that accused picked up quarrel in the matter of installing CC TV camera in front of the house of the informant and assaulted on his right shoulder with machete and also assaulted one Dinesh. At this stage, it cannot be concluded that petitioners are falsely implicated in the matter. However, the discharge summary produced by the petitioners for perusal of the Court discloses that the informant has sustained dis-location of his right shoulder and he was discharged on 29-12-2022. It is not in dispute that counter case is also registered on the basis of the first information lodged