IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 8010 of 2008 -------------------------------------- (CRIME NO. 989/2008 OF KOYILANDI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT) ........... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. ABINAS.T.N, S/O.BAVA, AGED 18 YEARS, FATHIMA MANZIL, KOLLAM POST, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. SAHIR, AGED 22 YEARS,S/O.ABDUL KHADER, VAYALIL HOUSE, KOLLAM POST, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. MUNEER, AGED 25 YEARS,S/O.ABOOBACKER, MUHSINAS, KOLLAM, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.ABDUL JALEEL. RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOYILANDI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE REP;BY THE P.PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. M.S. BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 8010 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2009 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 506(1), 308 read with section 149 IPC. According to prosecution, accused 1 to 6 along with some other identifiable persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and assaulted de facto complainant using iron rod, iron bar, etc. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners are accused 1, 2 and 4. As per the allegations in the First Information Statement, the assailants were using mask and hence, de facto complainant could not have identify the accused and petitioners are innocent, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that six persons are identified and the details are given in the First Information Statement itself. It is not correct to say that petitioners (A1, A2 and A4) were using mask. The incident occurred as early as on 41-12-2008 and petitioners are required for investigation and recovery of weapon. Hence, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that considering the serious nature of allegations made and in the nature of BA 8010/08 -2- investigation required, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 1) Hence, petitioners are directed to surrender before the Magistrate court concerned or before the Investigating Officer without any delay 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 by petitioners in this crime will be entertained by this Court, since this Court has already found, on the facts of this case, that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail and any finding to the contrary, will amount to review, which is impermissible in law. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.