IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3777 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.380/2010 OF CHERPU POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. (S): APPLICANTS/ACCUSED 2 & 3: --------------------------------------------- 1. JIBIN, S/O.SUDHAKARAN, PUTHUPULLI HOUSE, CHERPU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.VELAPPAN, PUTHUPULLI HOUSE, AMADOM P.O., MULLAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERPU POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.3777 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 24th June, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 332 and 353 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, there was a commotion while a ganamela was going on in the premises of a temple in connection with the festival. The police party went to the spot while all the accused (A1 to A4), in furtherance of common intention deterred the public servants from discharging their official duty. The first accused fisted a Police Constable and twisted his thumb. Others also joined the first accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that there is no specific allegation against petitioners. They are absolutely innocent. Petitioners were actually trying to pull off the person, who was assaulting the Police Constable. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the Police Constable is injured in the incident and petitioners are identified as assailants and not as interveners. BA NO. 2 This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides and considering the allegations made in the F.I. Statement, I am satisfied of the submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor. Considering the serious nature of the allegations made, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs