IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6729 of 2008() ----------------------------- CMP.6071/2008 of J.M.F.C.-III,THRISSUR CRIME NO. 568/2008 OF OLLUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED 1 TO 3 ---------------------------------- 1. T.H. RIYAS, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. HASSAINAR, PERIYATTADUKKAN HOUSE, PANAYAL, KASARAGOD TALUK. 2. SHEREEF @ MOOKU SHEREEF, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. ABBAS, BADHARIA HOUSE, ANANGOOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. AHAMMED KHABEER, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. ASSAINAR, NELLIKKATTA ROAD, VIDHYANAGAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MURUGAN P.V. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA - REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OLLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6729 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 332, 323, 353, 34 IPC and section 3(1) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. According to prosecution, petitioners (A1 to A3) were given food at the lock-up when they threw away the food stating that meat was not supplied. The Sub Inspector tried to open the lock-up and go inside. At that time accused caused damage to grill of the lock-up and also tried to escape from the lock-up and caused obstruction to de facto complainant, a police officer, from discharging the duty. 3. According to petitioners, petitioners are aged only 24, 22 and 25 years respectively and it is highly unbelievable that in a police lock-up, within the police station, where several police men are on duty, the three youngsters will dare to commit an offence of this nature. It is not possible to break or cause damage to iron materials or the lock. There is no case that petitioners used any weapon to cause the damage, it is submitted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners BA 6729/08 -2- are involved in other cases, including offence under sections 379 and 306 IPC, etc. Hence, they may not be released on bail, it is submitted. 5. On considering the rival contentions, I think the pendency of other cases alone may not be a ground to refuse bail to petitioners, in a case of this nature. Though petitioners alleged behaved in such aggressive manner, that too, within the police station, there is no case for anybody that any of the police officials or petitioners were injured in the incident. I find that petitioners have a strong and arguable case and petitioners will be able to establish the case only during trial. I do not find that petitioners' further detention in this case is not justified. 6. Hence, petitioners shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, on the following conditions:- 1) Petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday, Wednesday and Saturday between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. until further orders. 2) Petitioners shall not leave the limits of the BA 6729/08 -3- police station within which the crime is registered except with the prior permission of the learned Magistrate. 3) Petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail and in case breach of this condition, bail is liable to be cancelled. This petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.