IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2010 / 13TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2370 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.254/10 OF THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR. .................... (S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.7 ------------------------------------------- SALIM, S/O.MUSTHAFA, AGED 23 YEARS, KURIKKALA VALAPPIL HOUSE, KADAMBERI, ANDOOR AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE THROUGH S.H.O.TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.2370 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 3rd June, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 427, 448, 277 and 506(ii) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. According to prosecution, petitioner (accused No.7) along with other accused formed into an unlawful assembly and armed with deadly weapons like knife, iron rod etc., trespassed into an Anganavady and destroyed several articles kept there, including food prepared for supply to the children. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is implicated falsely in this case. Three crimes were registered on 20.3.2010 as Crime Nos.252, 253 and 254 of 2010. Petitioner's house was extensively damaged by the assailants and a crime was registered as crime No.253/10 on the statement given by petitioner. It is only as a counter blast to the said crimes that this case is registered. There was also an earlier incident, in which a case was registered as Crime No.252/10. The incident BA NO.2370/10 2 happened due to political rivalry, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the case diary reveals that the incident, as alleged has taken place. There is nothing to show that petitioner is not involved in the crime. 5. On hearing both sides and on considering the serious nature of the allegations made against petitioner, I do not think it fit to grant anticipatory bail. The weapons are not yet recovered and petitioner would be required for interrogation and recovery. The mere registration of other crimes by itself will not be sufficient to extend any benefit under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Petitioner is not able to establish or probabilise his innocence or his non-involvement. Hence, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs