IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6554 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.184/2008 OF NEDUMUDI POLICE STATION PETITIONERS: ACCUSED: ---------------------------- 1. MUHAMMAD NASEEM, MANNILE VEEDU, KUTTAPPUZHA P.O. 2. ANSARI.P.H., PUTHUPARAMPU, PALLIKKACHIRA P.O., PAIPAD. 3. PRAMIN ABRAHAM, KALLANKUNNIL, PERUNNA EAST P.O. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6554 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 179 of M.V. Act and Sections 109, 120B and 201 IPC read with Section 3(2)(e) of PDPP Act. According to prosecution, on 1.10.2008, at about 7.30 p.m., A1 drove a Tata Sumo Vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and hit against a motor cycle. On seeing this, police party chased the vehicle. But, in conspiracy of the first accused with other accused, who are passengers in the vehicle and as instigated by them, A1 hit against the police jeep and without stopping the vehicle, sped away. Later, a crime was registered and on investigation, it was found that the number plate, bumper, grill etc. of the vehicle were changed, in order to make the evidence disappear. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that it is only a pure case of an accident. The first accused is the driver of the vehicle and he was arrested by the police. Owner of the BA No.6554/2008 2 vehicle was also arrested. Petitioners are only passengers who have nothing to do with the accident. They were going to visit a person who was admitted in a hospital. Other allegations are false and those are made only because the defacto complainant is a Sub Inspector, it is submitted. 4. Learned public prosecutor submitted that the incident cannot be treated as a mere case of motor accident. It is a motivated attack on the police and the police officials were injured in the incident. Even thereafter, they changed the number plate, grill, bumper etc. of the vehicle with a view to make the evidence disappear. The offence was committed as instigated by all the accused and also a conspiracy was hatched for this purpose. Hence, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the nature of allegations made, subsequent conduct of the petitioners after the incident as revealed from the allegations made against them, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. The crime was registered as early as on 1.10.2008 and petitioners are not available for arrest so far. Petitioners will be required for arrest BA No.6554/2008 3 and interrogation. Hence, petitioners are directed to surrender before the Magistrate court or the Investigating Officer without any delay and co-operate with investigation. Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them at any time and proceeded against them in accordance with law. With this direction, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl