IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 7890 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.101/2011 OF ARECODE POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER : ACCUSED NO.24 ------------------------------ ABDURAHIMAN, S/O.UZHUNNAN MOHAMMED HAJI, KOLOTH HOUSE,MOORKANAD,URNGATTIRI PANCHAYATH, ARECODE POLICE STATION LIMIT, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARECODE THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.K.RENJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.7890 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.24 in Crime No.101 of 2011 of Arecode Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 332 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 12.3.2011 at about 5.30 A.M., while the police party was on patrol duty, they got information that sand was unauthorisedly being removed from Chaliyar river. The police party went to the Kadavu and they found three lorry loads of sand. On seeing the police, about 10 persons withdrew from the scene. Later, when the police party tried to remove the lorry, they were attacked by the accused. They pelted stones against the police party. An attempt was BA 7890/11 2 also made to forcibly take away the lorry which was seized by the police. 4. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl