IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7617 of 2008(F) ------------------------------------- CRIME NO.278/08 OF THIRUVALLAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/9TH ACCUSED : ---------------------------------- A.SIYAD, S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ 18 YEARS, T.C.65/1002 NARICKAL VILA VEEDU, PACHALLOOR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.7617 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 149, 332 of I.P.C. According to prosecution, defacto complainant is a conductor of a bus and he dissuaded the students from travelling on the foot board. Petitioner is a student. The students were agitated by the conduct of the conductor and they assaulted him and committed various offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the incident did not occur, as alleged. The conductor refused to pay back some balance amount to one of the passengers and the students raised some protest against this. This was not to the liking of the defacto complainant and hence false allegations are made against the accused. According to learned counsel for petitioner, defacto complainant is a member of a union of the ruling party and the petitioner was also a supporter of the ruling party. After some time, petitioner and some others formed another organisation and stopped working for the ruling party. Because of this, there was some enimity from the members of B.A.No.7617 of 2008 2 the ruling party against the petitioner. 4. Because of this enimity, when an incident happened involving certain students, petitioner's name was also given falsely. It was also submitted that the accused, who were arrested and remanded in this case were brutally assaulted by the police with the help of jail warden and they were hospitalised. Even from the jail, students had to face atrocities of the police and therefore if the petitioner is arrested, it is likely that he will also be subjected to assault by police. Annexure C is the paper report relating to incident, which took place in the jail. Hence, anticipatory bail may be granted, it is submitted. 5. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner's photo was shown to the defacto complainant and he was identified. It is true that the defacto complainant did not mention any of the names of the assailants but petitioner is involved in the case and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides, considering possibility of torture by police, I find that it is necessary to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner. If refused, I am satisfied that he will suffer irreparable B.A.No.7617 of 2008 3 injury and loss. Hence, the following order is passed : Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate court concerned within seven days from today and he shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions: i. Petitioner shall report before Investigating Officer as and when directed. ii. Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate any witness or commit any offence while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac