IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5414 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.464/08 OF KALPAKANCHERY POLICE STATION PETITIO0NER/1ST ACCUSED (NOT IN CUSTODY) --------------------------------------------------------- SARAFUDHEEN, S/O. KUNHIMOIDEENKUTTY, AGED 19 YEARS, POLAKKODAN HOUSE, KODASSERIPPARA, KURUMBATHUR P.O., MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA/SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAKKAL AND KALPAKANCHERRY POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 5414 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th August, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 353 and 308 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and 4(1)(a) read with 21(1) (b) of the Minor Mineral Development Regulation Act. According to prosecution, petitioner, who is the first accused, was transporting sand illegally in a vehicle, without licence and forest officials followed him in a vehicle to detect the crime. The petitioner applied sudden brake in such a way to cause an accident and endanger human life. After stopping the vehicle, the petitioner ran away. But the cleaner, who was present in the vehicle, was arrested from the spot and he is the second accused in the case. The incident occurred on 6.8.2008 and the petitioner could not be arrested so far. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations made. The second accused alone was arrested from the spot. After his arrest, police insisted that the vehicle must be produced and one BA.5414/08 2 Haneefa produced the vehicle before the police and he also informed the police that the petitioner was driving the vehicle at the relevant time and that is how the petitioner is made an accused. He is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner was engaged in illegal sand mining and the de facto complainant identified the petitioner, who ran away. His identity is revealed and in a case of this nature, it is not proper to grant anticipatory bail. It cannot be said that petitioner is implicated only because of the statement made by the owner of the vehicle. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that in the nature of the allegations made against the petitioner, it is not proper to grant anticipatory bail. The petitioner could not be arrested so far and he will be required for interrogation. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.