IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6615 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.454/08 OF PAVARATTY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ------------------------------------------- PRAMOD, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, ANEDATHARAYIL VEEDU, PAVARATTY. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 6615 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 120B, 153A, 143, 147, 148, 324, 326 and 307 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, on 21.8.2008 at about 1.30 PM, petitioner (first accused) along with four other accused, formed into an unlawful assembly, in pursuance of a conspiracy and assaulted de facto complainant and her husband with weapons like sword etc. and attempted to commit murder. Grievous injury was also sustained by de facto complainant and her husband. Accused are activists of RSS and de facto complainant and her husband are Muslims, who are supported by NDF, which is a rival political party. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is the President of 'Yuvamorcha' and he is an active worker of BJP. He is falsely implicated in this case with ulterior motive. The modus operandi of workers of rival political parties is to implicate leaders of the opposite party, whenever any political clash occurs. It is also submitted that petitioner has been working in BJP for the past so many years and so far he has not been implicated in any case. This is for the first time that he was arrayed as an accused, only because BA.6615/08 2 he became an office bearer of 'Yuvamorcha', it is submitted. Petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that at the time of giving First Information Statement, names of accused could not be ascertained and they were only identifiable by sight. Later, it could be revealed on investigation that petitioner and four others were involved in the offence. They had also used weapons like sword etc. and both de facto complainant as well as her husband had sustained grievous injury in the assault. There are only vague and general allegations that petitioner is falsely implicated. Petitioner has allegedly used a sword for commission of the offence and it has to be recovered by interrogating petitioner. Therefore, anticipatory bail may not be granted, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that it is only a bald assertion that petitioner is innocent and that he has been falsely implicating because he is an office bearer of 'Yuvamorcha'. But, on investigation it was revealed that petitioner has a role in the offences and he has also allegedly used a weapon. Petitioner's interrogation is essential for effecting the recovery of alleged weapon used for the offence. Therefore, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The incident occurred on 21.8.2008 and petitioner was not available for investigation so far. BA.6615/08 3 Petitioner is directed to surrender before investigating officer or the Magistrate Court concerned and co-operate with the investigation without any delay. Whether petitioner surrenders before police or not, police is at liberty to arrest petitioner. With this direction and observation, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.