Anticipatory bail may be granted when accusations lack malice and do not pose a threat to justice, conditioned upon the applicant's cooperation and compliance.

K.BABU, J.

--------------------------------------

B.A No.12795 of 2025 ---------------------------------------

Dated this the 19^th day of November, 2025 O R D E R This is an application seeking anticipatory bail filed under Section

482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

2. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.129/2025 of Ottapalam Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case as narrated in Annexure 3 order, reads thus:

“The defacto complainant took photo of taking and loading soil in a tipper by the accused. Due to that grudge, on 04.02.2025 at 15.40 hours near Vaniyamkulam market on Kothakurissi road, accused Nos.1 to 3 with intention of committing assault to the defacto complainant, wrongfully restrained him, dragged him out of his car bearing registration No.KL-51- P-2016, accused No.1 beat him with an iron road and accused No.2 beat him with a helmet by threatening to kill abettor, assaulted the defacto complainant.”[SIC]

4. The case of the petitioners is as follows:

“3. The petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against them. The 1^st petitioner herein is engaged in the contract business of removing waste materials from construction sites. The 1^st petitioner owns two tipper lorries and one hitachi vehicle. The petitioners 2 and 3 are the staff of the 1^st petitioner. The father of the defacto complainant is a helper of the 1^st petitioner and is like his father and he is taking care of him.

4. The defacto complainant has projected a false story before the police officials and has twisted the actual facts. As mentioned above, the father of the defacto complainant is a helper of the 1^st petitioner and he is taking care of him, who is not in good terms with the defacto complainant. In fact, on the alleged day of incident, the defacto complainant tried to assault his father and the same was prevented by the petitioners. The defacto complainant and his father are not in good relationship. As the 1^st petitioner is taking care of the father of the defacto complainant, the defacto complainant had grudge towards the 1^st petitioner. On the alleged day of incident, the defacto complainant tried to assault his father in connection with a property dispute. The defacto complainant has filed a false and frivolous suit against his father as O.S No. 54/2025 before the Munsiff's Court, Ottapalam, praying for injunction.”[SIC]

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

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they have been implicated in this crime due to enmity resulting from the fact that the 1^st petitioner is protecting the father of the defacto complainant.

It is further submitted that civil litigations are pending between the defacto complainant and his father. It is also submitted that the victim sustained a minor injury.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the defacto complainant sustained a minimally displaced linear fracture in the frontal process of the right maxilla.

8. I have gone through the Case Diary.

9. While considering the scope of jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab [ (1980) 2 SCC 565 ] held thus:

“31. In regard to anticipatory bail, if the proposed accusation appears to stem not from motives of furthering the ends of justice but from some ulterior motive, the object being to injure and humiliate the applicant by having him arrested, a direction for the release of the applicant on bail in the event of his arrest would generally be made. On the other hand, if it appear