IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2008 / 25TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4485 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 204/2008 OF VALLIKUNNAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:- -------------------------------------- 1. SURESH .S, S/O SURENDRAN,KOCHUPLAMVILA THEKKETHIL, VETTICODE P.O., VETTICODE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. SUBASH @ RAMACHANDRAN,S/O KUNJUPANICKAN CHERUVALLITHARAYIL,VETTICODE P.O., VETTICOCE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. SUDHEESH KUMAR @ UNNI, S/O BHASKARAN, CHERUVALLITHARAYIL, VETTICOCE P.O.,VETTICOCE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.PRAKASH RESPONDENT: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 4485 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of July, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail 2. The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148, 427 and 308 read with section 149 IPC. According to the prosecution, the defacto- complainant who was riding a motor bike was attacked by the petitioners and others who formed themselves into an unlawful assembly. A complaint was lodged by the injured before the police, based on which a crime was registered. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the police is attempting to arrest the petitioners in connection with the crime. They are absolutely innocent of the allegations made. They are not implicated in the First Information Statement. Only two accused were named in the First Information Statement, but the others were only identifiable by sight. The petitioners are absolutely innocent of the allegations made and hence they may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. It is also submitted that the petitioners were implicated only after filing of this application on 8-7-2008. BA 4485/08 -2- In an application for bail by the co-accused it was submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the other accused are to be identified. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, even at that time, the identity of the accused was not confirmed. 4. This application is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners are accused 3, 4, and 6 in the crime. As early as on 23- 6-2008 (the date of occurrence) witnesses were questioned and it is revealed from their statements that the petitioners are also involved in the crime and a report was also filed before the court on the very next day i.e., on 24-6-2008. It is not correct to say that the petitioners were implicated only after filing of the application. It is true that submissions were made during hearing of a bail application that the co-accused are to be identified. As per the First Information Statement itself, the defacto-complainant can identify the petitioners only by sight and for that purpose, presence of the petitioners will be required for interrogation. But, that does not mean that their identity was not revealed earlier. It is also submitted that this is an off- shoot of a communal rivalry between two groups and there were other clashes in the locality on account of communal rivalry. Hence, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. BA 4485/08 -3- 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied of the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am also satisfied that the petitioners' presence would be required for interrogation and identification of the accused by the defacto-complainant. Hence, it may not be proper to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The application is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.