IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7983 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.476/2008 OF THIRTHALA POLICE STATION) PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. K.V.NOUSHAD, S/O. MOIDUNNI, KALLINGAL VALAPPIL HOUSE, PATTITHARA POST, THRITHALA VIA PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. MUHAMMED RAFIQ, S/O. IBRAHIM, PANTHAMPULAKKAL HOUSE, PATTITHARA POST, THRITHALA VIA.PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERLA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRITHALA POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl. No. 7983 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of February, 2009. ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Section 353 and 12 of IPC read with section 20 of Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act. According to prosecution, petitioners, who are accused nos. 1 and 2, were engaged in transportation of illegal sand and when the Village Officer intercepted the vehicle, petitioners pushed him off and drove away the vehicle and thereby caused obstruction to the discharge of his official duty. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged. First accused is the owner of an autorickshaw and the authorities are helping the tipper lorry owners and this case is filed only with a view to help such owners. It is also submitted that no sand was seized from the possession of accused and hence anticipatory bail may be granted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the incident occurred on 18.12.2009 and petitioner could not be arrested so far. The The seizure of the vehicle also could not be effected until 4.1.2009 as per the [B.A.7983/08] 2 instructions dated 4.1.2009, it is submitted. Therefore, non- seizure of sand will not be quite relevant and it will not support petitioner's case, it is submitted. In a case of this nature, it is not fit to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied of the submission made by learned Public Prosecutor. Considering the serious nature of the allegations made, In a case of this nature, it is not fit to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioners are bound to surrender and co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the following order is passed: 1) Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer forthwith and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. 2) No further application for anticipatory bail by the petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this Court. Petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.