IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4554 of 2009() ------------------------------------ C.R.NO. 880/2005 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION .................. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- ABDUL SALAM, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED, 'JALEEL MANZIL', MARA, CHENGALA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.K.P.HARISH RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. STATE-REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, (CR.NO.880 OF 2005 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION), KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 4554 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.5 in C.R No.880/2005 of Kasaragod Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 304 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 6/12/2005 at 3 A.M., the accused persons pelted stones towards the driver of a tanker lorry. The 6th December was being observed as “Babri Masjid Day”. On that day, some section of people would observe hartal. On the ground that the lorry was being plied on that day, the accused pelted stones. The driver of the lorry lost control of the vehicle. The vehicle hit on a tree. As a result of the injuries, the driver died. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, the allegations B.A. No. 4554/2009 2 levelled against the petitioner and other circumstances and also taking note of the fact that the incident took place about 4 years before, on 6/12/2005 and taking into account the fact that several accused persons including the petitioner could not be arrested, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm