IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2008 / 18TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4307 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 332/2008 OF NADAPURAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED --------------------------------------- V.V. MUHAMMEDALI, S/O.MOIDU HAJI, AGED 29, KELOTHTAZHEKUNIYIL HOUSE, CHELAKKAD, NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE DT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NADAPURAM POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 4307 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of July, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 427 and 332 read with section 149 IPC and section 3 (2)(e) of the P.D.P.P. Act. According to the prosecution, on 21-6- 2008 at about 10.45 a.m. while the training class for teachers under the S.S.A. Scheme was going on in the Government School, Nadapuram, the petitioner and others formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons trespassed in to the class room where the training was going on, raised slogans against the implementation of the controversial text book in the VIIth Standard in the school and assaulted two teachers and caused damage to the furniture in the class room. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the allegations made. He has been falsely implicated in the crime only due to political rivalry. BA 4307/08 -2- The petitioner is shown as the 1st accused in the complaint filed by the Project Coordinator who was coordinating the programme. According to the petitioner, he is a prominent leader of K.S.T.A., a teachers' association affiliated to the C.P.I.(M) which is now in the ruling front. It is pointed out that though the Headmaster of the school was present, he did not make any complaint and, according to the petitioner, the Headmaster refused to implicate the petitioner at the request of the police and hence the complaint was field by the defacto-complainant who is on inimical terms with the petitioner because of political reasons. 4. It is also submitted that the alleged incident took place at 10-45 a.m. but the petitioner was working at M.I.M.H.S.S. Perode, which is situated 5 k.m. away from the place of occurrence. He was on duty on that day and a certificate issued by the Principal of the School is produced as Annexure-A2. 5. The application is strongly opposed. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner's name is specifically stated in the First Information Statement and specific overt acts are also attributed against him and as per the case diary, it cannot be said that the petitioner is not involved in the crime at BA 4307/08 -3- all. In an offence of this nature, it is submitted, anticipatory bail may not be granted. 6. On hearing both sides, and on perusing the documents , I am of the opinion that in offence of this nature, anticipatory bail can be refused only to persons who are actually involved. As per Annexure-A2, it, prima facie, appears that the petitioner was on duty in a school which is situated far away from the place of occurrence on the date and time of occurrence in this case. The equitable discretionary powers under section 438 Cr.P.C. has to be invoked to prevent and protect person from any probable false implication. However, I make it clear that the veracity of Annexure-A2 can still be questioned during trial, not withstanding any thing stated in this order. Any way, on the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that it is only fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Hence, the following order is passed:- The petitioner, in the event of his arrest, shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that the petitioner shall not intimidate or BA 4307/08 -4- threaten the defacto-complainant or witnesses while on bail and in case breach of this condition, bail is liable to be cancelled. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.