IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2011 / 28TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6504 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.268/2011 IN BADIADKA POLICE STATION (S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 TO 3 --------------------------------------------- 1. SHAREEF,S/O. B.S. MOHAMMED, BAPALIPONAM HOUSE,ARIYAPADY POST, NEERCHAL VILLAGE,KASARAGODE TALUK. 2. SOOPI,S/O.B.S. MOHAMMED, BAPALIPONAM HOUSE,ARIYAPADY POST, NEERCHAL VILLAGE,KASARAGODE TALUK. 3. KHALID, S/O. SEETHI KUNHI, KAVAMOOLA HOUSE,ARIYAPADY POST, NEERCHAL VILLAGE,KASARAGOD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BADIADKA POLICE STATION,KASARAGOD, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON FOR ADDL.R2 SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI FOR ADDL.R2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. --------------------------------------- B.A.No.6504 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of August, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners are some of the accused (A1 to A3) in Crime No.268/2011 registered for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 308 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case is that on 30.7.2011 at about 6.45 p.m., while one Mr. Ibrahim Sakafi, one among the injured in the case, was proceeding through the public road, the accused in the case wrongfully restrained and assaulted him with deadly weapons. The defacto complainant intervened to stop the assault and he was attacked, and thereby he too sustained injuries. A crime registered over the occurrence is still under investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both injured had sustained only minor injuries, but, to aggravate the case, the offence under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code has been included. Further submission is that these B.A.No.6504 of 2011 2 petitioners have been implicated in the crime on false allegations. 4. The aforesaid Sakafi has moved an application for getting himself impleaded as an additional respondent, and that was allowed. 5. I heard the learned counsel for the aforesaid injured also, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor points out that pursuant to collection of further materials and taking note of that the injured Sakafi has suffered a fracture also, the offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code has been incorporated and investigation is continuing including such offence, with a report thereof filed before the Court concerned. Release of the petitioner at this stage is opposed. The case diary has also been produced for my perusal. 7. I have perused the case diary with reference to the submissions made on both sides. I find that at this stage, when the materials covered by the investigating agency give room to suspect the culpability of the petitioners in the offences imputed, the discretionary relief of pre arrest bail cannot be B.A.No.6504 of 2011 3 extended to petitioners. They have to approach the investigating officer and cooperate with the investigation or to move the Court concerned to seek regular bail. sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. rkc //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE