IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 27TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7930 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.454/08 OF CHERUTHURUTHY POLICE STATION PETITIONERS -------------------- 1. NASEER, S/O.MUHAMMED, PUTHENPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, VAVANNUR, OTTAPPALAM. 2. SHAHUL HAMEED, S/O.MUHAMMED, MANIYARATH HOUSE, VAVANNUR, OTTAPPALAM BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOTR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 7930 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th February, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 20 of the Kerala River Bank Protection and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act. According to prosecution, a lorry loaded with illegal sand which was driven by first accused was taken into custody by the police on 27.11.2008. Accused 2 and 3 forcibly took away the lorry from the custody of police and thereby committed the offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent of the allegations made. Petitioners are implicated by rival group engaged in sand mining. 4. This petition is opposed. The allegations made against petitioners are serious in nature and hence, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the serious nature of BA.7930/08 2 allegations made, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The incident happened as early as on 27.11.2008 and petitioners are not available for interrogation. Hence, the following order is passed: (1) Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation. Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them and proceed in accordance with law. (2) No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this Court, since this Court has already ordered that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, on appreciation of the facts and circumstances and hence, any order passed to the contrary in any subsequent application for anticipatory bail may amount to review, which is not permissible in law. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.