IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2009 / 14TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 30 of 2009(C) ---------------------------------- CRIME NO.926/2008 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ------------------------------ 1. A2 -- RAFEEK @ S/O.ABDUL RAHMAN, AZAD NAGAR, CHWKI KASARAGOD. 2. A3 -- JALEEL, S/O.MOIDEEN, BADAR NAGAR, CHWKI, KASARAGOD. 3. A4 -- AYAS, S/O.HASSAN, CHAMMANAD, KASARAGOD. 4. A5 -- SHAHUL HAMEED, S/O.MOHAMMED, PANCHATH KUNNU, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD POLICE STATION. REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. -------------------------------- B.A. No.30 OF 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 308 read with 149 of I.P.C. According to prosecution, the accused formed into an unlawful assembly and armed with deadly weapons like sword, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and assaulted him and committed the various offences. First accused used the weapon. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the F.I.R. contains five names but, those are not the names of petitioners. Petitioners are persons with different names and now there is an attempt to include them also in the array of accused. Petitioners are innocent and hence, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that five names were mentioned in the F.I. Statement and the allegation is that they along with three identifiable persons committed the offences. It is true that the names stated in the F.I. Statement and the names of petitioners do not tally, but the names stated in F.I. Statement are nick names of B.A.No.30 of 2009 2 petitioners. A report was filed before the Magistrate court concerned by the Investigating Officer stating that petitioners are accused nos.3, 2, 5 and 4 respectively. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides, I find that the discrepancy pointed out cannot be made a ground to grant anticipatory bail especially since it is explained by the prosecution, as per the report submitted before the court. There are no special circumstances for this court to invoke Section 438 Cr.P.C. Considering the nature of allegations made, I find that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioners are bound to surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation. Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer or before the Magistrate court concerned forthwith and co-operate with the investigation. Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them and proceed in accordance with law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac