IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH APRIL 2009 / 25TH CHAITHRA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1993 of 2009() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.966/2008 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION) PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 3 AND 4 ----------------------------------------------- 1. AMJATH @ HAMJATH SHAMEENA, S/O. B.K.MAHIM, INDIRA NAGAR, P.O.CHENGALA, MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK. 2. MUHAMMED SHUHAIB S/O. ABDUL KHADER, SHANAS COTTAGE, NGO ROAD, P.O.VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN SRI.T.R.TARIN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD POLICE STATION. 2. STATE, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR K S SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 1993 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of April, 2009. ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 308 read with Section 149 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly along with other accused and attacked de facto complainant due to political rivalry and inflicted various injuries. Iron rod and sticks were used for the offence. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that offence under Section 308 IPC is included only to harass petitioners. De facto complainant has not sustained any serious injury. He is an S.F.I worker and petitioners are implicated only because of political rivalry. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Weapons used for the offence are to be recovered. Petitioners are accused 3 and 4 and they are required for interrogation. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, considering the serious nature of allegations made. Petitioners are bound to surrender and co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation. However, it is made BA 1993/2009 clear that for the purpose of bail, offence under Section 308 IPC will be treated as excluded, considering the nature of injury sustained. Hence, the following order is passed:- 1. Petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer without any delay and co-operate with the investigation. Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them and proceed in accordance with law. 2. No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioners in this crime will be entertained by this court, since on the facts in this case, this court ordered that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail and any order to the contrary in any subsequent anticipatory bail application will amount to review, which is impermissible in law. The petition is dismissed. P BHAVADASAN, JUDGE lgk