IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6964 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.276/08 OF MANJESHWARAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- MUHAMMED AZAR AGED 24, S/O.SHEIKH ABDUL SAMAD, ZAMEER MANSIL, HIDAYATH NAGAR UPPALA, P.O. UPPALA, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANTS --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANJESHWARAM POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 6964 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th December, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 144, 147, 148, 452, 395 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, a relative of accused 1, 3 and 6 in this crime was murdered. But, accused in that case were not arrested. Therefore, accused 1 to 7 in this case trespassed into the house of de facto complainant, where accused in the murder case who are de facto complainant's brother are residing. and assaulted her and her mother. Since brothers were not available, their sister and mother were assaulted. Rs.25,000/- and 32 sovereigns of gold ornaments were allegedly robbed by accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that people of the locality were agitated, since accused in the murder case were not arrested. Therefore, they trespassed into the house of first and second accused in the murder case, and committed certain offences. But petitioner is absolutely innocent of the BA.6964/08 2 allegations made. He has nothing to do with the offence. He was not available in the station at that time. He was at Bangalore. Therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. It is also submitted that though the name of accused shown in the FIR tally with that of petitioner, father's name differs. According to prosecution, he is the son of “Sunna Sahib”, but petitioner is also son of Sheik Abdul Samad. Therefore, there is a mistake in the identity of petitioner, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner is arrayed as fourth accused. The incident happened on 5.10.2008, and he has not co-operated with the investigation. The allegations made in this case are serious and hence, it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. He also submitted that petitioner is the person, who is wanted by the police. It is true that his father's name is shown as “Sunna Sahib”, but later a report is given and since it was revealed that “Sunna Sahib's” original name is “Sheikh Abdul Samad”, who is also known as Sunna Sahib. There is no mistake in the identity, it is submitted. BA.6964/08 3 On hearing both sides, considering the nature of allegations made, I am satisfied that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Regarding the plea of alibi, there is only a bare assertion, which cannot be acted upon at this stage. So also, his assertion of innocence is also not substantiated. Petitioner is directed to surrender before investigating officer within five days from today and co-operate with the investigation. Whether petitioner surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest petitioner and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.