IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2008 / 22ND SRAVANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5071 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.362/2008 OF EDACHERY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 TO 3: --------------------------- 1. NAJEEB, S/O.AHAMMED, AGED 21 YEARS KINATTANKANDI HOUSE, POST KUTTIADY KUTTIADY AMSOM, THONDIPOYIL DESOM 2. AJINAS, S/O. AMMED,AGED 21 YEARS UKKARANPARAMBATH HOUSE, P.O.MUTHUVANNACHA VOA KUTTIADY,VADAKKUMPAD AMSOM,PALERI DESOM 3. ANAS, S/O. MOIDU AGED 21 YEARS, KUNIYIL HOUSE,ADUKKATH PO VIA KUTTIADY, ADUKKATH AMSOM, MARUTHOMKARA DESOM BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDACHERY POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY P.P. SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 5071 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of August, 2008 O R D E R The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148 and 307 read with section 149 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioners along with other accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly on 16-7-2008 at the college campus, came in a jeep armed with deadly weapons like sword, iron rod, sword stick etc. and assaulted the defacto-complainant and he sustained injuries including fracture. The defacto complainant is a leader of a student union S.F.I., whereas accused are members of another student organization which is supported by another political rival group N.D.F. According to the prosecution, the members of the S.F.I. were against another student union functioning in the college, and that was the reason for the incident. 2. According to earned counsel for the petitioners, the defacto complainant is a leader of S.F.I. ,which is supported by the ruling party. The petitioners are implicated falsely by magnifying the nature of the allegations made and including offence under section 307 IPC also. No weapons were used and no serious injuries were caused. The petitioners are final year BA 5071/08 -2- students and if they are remanded in to the custody, that will spoil their future, it is submitted. 3. This application is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the defacto-complainant sustained serious injury. Iron rod and sword were used for the offence by the students and those are to be recovered. The petitions are to be interrogated for the purpose of recovery of the weapons. The defacto-complainant had sustained injures including a fracture and he was hospitalized. In such circumstances, in an offence of this nature, anticipatory bail may not be granted, it is strongly submitted. 4. On hearing both sides, it is clear that the offence took place within the college campus. The motive for the crime is rivalry between the two student organizations, which are supported by rival political parties. Time and again, the courts were discouraging politics inside college campus. It is also revealed that sword and iron rod were used for the offence within the campus. The students are expected to carry books and not weapons. The defacto complainant also sustained a fracture. I am strongly dissuaded by all these facts to grant anticipatory bail in an offence of this nature. According to me, granting of BA 5071/08 -3- anticipatory bail will only encourage repetition of such activities in future also. This application is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.