IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6514 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.363/2008 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. SHAFEEK, BEERICHERY P.O., THRIKARIPUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. K.M.KUNHI, THALICHALAM, P.O.ELEMBACHI, THRIKARIPUR, KASARAGOD DT. 3. ANEES, MAIDANI, P.O. ELAMBACHI, THRIKARIPUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANJAY SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6514 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 448, 427, 308 read with section 149 IPC. According to prosecution, a sports meet was held in a Government Higher Secondary School, while at the venue some people started teasing girls. The de facto complainant and others intervened and they were sent out. Thereafter, due to enmity, petitioners formed themselves in to an unlawful assembly on 8-10-2008 at about 2 p.m., committed house trespass into the library, where de facto complainant was working as the President and destroyed the articles in the library and thereby caused a loss of Rs.5,000/-. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that there were clashes between C.P.I.(M) and I.U.M.L. workers. The present case is falsely foisted against petitioners, as a counter blast, since petitioner being workers of I.U.M.L. had filed five other cases against workers of C.P.I.(M). Petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that considering the facts of this case, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. No political rivalry is BA 6514 /08 -2- involved in this case and the motive alleged involves eve-teasing. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied of the submissions made by learned Public Prosecutor and I find that it is not fit to grant anticipatory bail. There is nothing to support the contentions raised by petitioners. The incident occurred early as on 8-10-2008 and petitioners are required for the purpose of investigation. Therefore, 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, respondent is at liberty to arrest them and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.