IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2010 / 19TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2985 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.320/2010 OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM. (S): APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.1&2. --------------------------------------------- 1. NASHEETH KHAN, S/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN, KALLUMURIVAYIL HOUSE, MAMPAD P.O., MALAPPURAM. 2. HARIF P., S/O. MUHAMMED, PANTHAR HOUSE, MAMPAD P.O., MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT. --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE S.I. OF POLICE, NILAMBUR POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.2985 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 9th June, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 308 and 332 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 23 read with Section 20 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act. According to prosecution, police got information that illegal sand mining was going on at a Kadavu. Two Police Constables went to the spot in a motor bike and found that illegal sand mining was going on. On seeing the police, accused 1 to 3 tried to escape with half filled lorry. The police kept the motor bike in such a way to block their escape. But, the accused removed the motor bike, while the Police Constables stood in front of the lorry to prevent them from moving, but the lorry was sped away and the Constables had to move out to save their life. In the meanwhile, Police Constables were assaulted by accused. 3. Petitioners are first and second accused. The driver is also implicated, but his name is not mentioned in the F.I. Statement. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that BA NO.2985/10 2 petitioners are absolutely innocent of the allegations made. The number of the lorry is mentioned in the F.I. Statement as KL-10-V- 3505 and the said lorry does not belong to petitioners. First petitioner is the owner of several other mini lorries, but he has absolutely nothing to do with the lorry, which is involved in this case. A false case is foisted against petitioners at the instance of the Sub Inspector, with whom, first petitioner had some quarrel in connection with some other issue. It is to wreak vengeance upon first accused that a false case is foisted against him, it is submitted. 4. Petitioners are not the driver or the owner of the lorry involved. Since petitioners are falsely implicated, they apprehend that they will be harassed and they will suffer irreparable injury, if they appear before the Investigating Officer, it is submitted. It is also submitted that no injury is caused to the Police Constables and no weapon was used for the offence and no recovery is to be effected. Petitioners are prepared to surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I. Statement itself and they are implicated as accused Nos.1 and 2 in the F.I.R. It is not correct to BA NO.2985/10 3 say that they are falsely implicated. The investigation is in progress, regarding the ownership etc. Petitioners are not implicated either as the owner or the driver of the lorry. They were present at the scene, as per the allegations. [It is submitted by petitioner's counsel that for the release of the lorry, a petition was filed by some other person before the Magistrate Court. As per the written instructions dated 3.5.2010, the lorry was not seized, learned Public Prosecutor replied]. 6. On hearing both sides and on considering the serious nature of the allegations made, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. But, I make it clear that considerations for grant of bail and anticipatory bail are different. The crime is registered as early as on 2.5.2010 and petitioners are bound to surrender and co-operate with the investigation. They are at liberty to surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned also, if they are so advised and seek appropriate relief without delay. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs