IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2010 / 24TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3551 of 2010() ---------------------------------- CRIME NO. 507/2010 OF OLLUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED : ----------------------------- 1. MANUAL, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, PALLATH HOUSE, THAMMANAM DESOM, POONITHARA VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM 2. SABU AGED 40, S/O.JOSE PALAKKURICHIYIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM DESOM, KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE, KUNNATHU NADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 3. SUNIL BABU, AGED 40,S/O.CHANDRAN, KAKKADAN HOUSE, CHANDANGAKULAM DESOM, THIRUVALI VILLAGE, NILAMBUR. 4. MANIKANDAN, AGED 34, S/O.KUNJAN, PARADHANI VEEDU, WADAKKANCHERY VILLAGE, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. KRIPA, AGED 37, S/O.KRISHNAN, KOTTUVALA HOUSE, VILANGANNUR DESOM, PEECHI VILLAGE, TRISSUR. 6. USMAN, AGED 28,S/O.ABOOKAKKAR, MELETHIL HOUSE,CHEMBRASSERY DESOM, PANDIKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 7. KUNJILAKSHMI, AGED 61, W/O.CHAMI, PAZHAYATHOTTATHIL VEEDU, KARIMBA VILLAGE, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD. 8. GOWRI, AGED 27, D/O.MALA, MALLIKAPARA VEEDU, APPALA DESOM, WILLAGE, THIRUNELLI, WAYANAD. B.A.No. 3551 of 2010() 2 9. JENNY, AGED 44,W/O.MANUAL, PALLATH VEEDU, THAMMANAM DESOM,POONITHURA VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM 10. THANKAMMA, AGED 30, D/O.VELAYUDHAN, NARAKAKOLLI VEEDU,NOOLPUZHA VILLAGE, BATHERY DESOM. BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS: -------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, OLLUR POLICE STATION, OLLUR, TRISSUR BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 3551 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of June, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 427 and 506(ii) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(ii) of P.D.P.P. Act and Sections 10 and 13 of Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Act, 1967. According to prosecution, on 23.05.2010 at about 10.20 A.M., petitioners, 10 in numbers, along with other accused trespassed into the godown of “Reliance Retails Ltd” and committed mischief by damaging various articles and thereby caused a loss of Rs. 5,00,000/-. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that there was an agitation against price hike and a procession was conducted in support of the same. Petitioners have not committed any offences under Sections 10 and 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 but those sections are included only with a view to harm the petitioners. It is argued that going by those provisions, even if the contentions of prosecution are accepted, B.A. No. 3551 of 2010 2 petitioners cannot be proceeded. Petitioners are arrested on 23.05.2010 and they are in custody for the past 23 days. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners are members of an organisation called 'Porattam'. Though this organisation was not banned, it is revealed from investigation that they are connected with Mavooist group and it is suspected that they are indulging in unlawful activities as defined in Section 2 of the Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Act. Investigation is in progress and if petitioners are released at this stage, it is likely to affect the investigation adversely. 5. On hearing both sides, in the light of the serious allegations made against the petitioners and considering the stage of investigation, I am satisfied that it may not be proper to grant bail to petitioners at this stage. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln