IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2392 of 2010() ---------------------------------------- CRIME NO.69/2010 OF THE BADIYADUKA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD. .................. PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED ----------------------------------------- RAFEEQ. P.M, S/O. K. MUHAMMED, AGED 25 YEARS, P.M. HOUSE, CHANDRAMPARA, NEKRAJE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT, SMT.R.LEELA. RESPONDENT/STATE AND COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BADIYADUKA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.M.S. BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. K. HEMA, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 2392 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 341, 153 A and 506(ii) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, on 28.02.2010 at about 8 P.M., petitioner (A4) along with other accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, with the common object for promoting enmity between two religious groups, committed various offences. They made certain statements which would create religious disharmony and de facto complainant was also beaten up with sticks by the accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is the 4th accused and he is innocent of the allegations made. He was working in an ice factory, which situated close by. But on the said occurrence the factory was closed and he was not present at the scene. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and he submitted that the petitioners name find a place in F.I. B.A. No. 2392 of 2010 2 Statement itself and as per the records it is revealed that he had taken part in the offence. The weapons used for the offence are to be recovered. On hearing both sides, I find that the petitioner may be required for interrogation and recovery of material objects. Though he asserts innocence, there is only a bare assertion. In the above circumstances, I find no ground to grant anticipatory bail. Hence the following order is passed: Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not police is at liberty to arrest and proceed in accordance with law. Petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln