IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3427 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.172/2010 OF BADIADKA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DIST. (S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- 1. P.BALAKRISHNAN,AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.RAMANKUTTY NAIR,RESIDING AT KRISHNAKRIPA HOUSE, NEAR GOPALAKRISHNA THEATRE, KOIPPADY VILLAGE,KASARAGODA DIST. 2. ABDULLA @ ABDULRAHIMAN,AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM,R/AT AMEKKALA HOUSE,ENMAKAJE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,BADIADKA POLICE STATION, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.3427 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 15th July, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 332, 427 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, a procession was conducted by the workers of CPI(M) and, on seeing a car of a Congress worker parked by the side of the road, stones were pelted at it. The police tried to interfere and workers of CPI(M) as well as the Congress party pelted stones at the police. The Sub Inspector and also a Police Constable were injured and they sustained injuries while they were discharging their official duty. 3. Petitioners are accused nos.13 and 14 in the crime. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners are not involved in the crime. They were only 12 accused originally, but petitioners are subsequently brought into the array of accused. There is nothing to connect petitioners with the crime, it is submitted. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public BA NO. 3427/10 2 Prosecutor submitted that two petitions were filed for bail and anticipatory bail (B.A.Nos.3018 & 3105 of 2010) and as per a common order dated 28.5.2010, this Court dismissed both the applications. It is true that only the names of 12 accused were mentioned in the F.I.R., but there is an allegation in the F.I. Statement itself that there were other identifiable persons. On investigation, petitioners' complicity in the offence is made out and there are materials to connect petitioners with the offence. It is also pointed out that in Kasaragod district, political clashes are common. There are several instances, in which police officials are attacked. If anticipatory bail is granted, it will send a wrong message to the public, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides and considering the facts pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor and also the fact that investigation reveals the complicity of petitioners in the offence, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Though petitioners would assert their innocence, there is nothing to probabilise the same. In a case of this nature, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail, since as pointed out by learned Public Prosecutor, it would send a wrong message to the public. BA NO. 3427/10 3 No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioners in this crime will be entertained by this court hereafter. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs