High Court Kerala High Court

Abdul Samad vs State Of Kerala on 4 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
Abdul Samad vs State Of Kerala on 4 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 5315 of 2009()


1. ABDUL SAMAD, S/O.HAMZA,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. N.V.SIDDIQUE, S/O.VEERANKUTTY,
3. SHAJI, S/O.VELAYUDHAN,
4. DHILIP KUMAR, S/O.CHATHUKUTTY,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.V.ASOKAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :04/11/2009

 O R D E R
                        K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                      ---------------------------
                     B.A. No. 5315 of 2009
                 ------------------------------------
            Dated this the 4th day of November, 2009

                             O R D E R

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438

of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused

Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No. 250/2009 of Kuttipuram Police Station.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under

Sections 332 and 353 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

3. The prosecution case is the following :-

On 26.08.2009 at about 8 A.M., the Revenue Divisional

Officer and Revenue Officials went to Vellancherry kadavu in

Thavannur Panchayath. At that time, the accused persons tried to

cause danger to the life of the Revenue Divisional Officer and party

by taking a lorry bearing Registration No. KL 8 E 318 towards the

reverse direction. Due to the timely intervention of one of the

Revenue Officials the life of the Revenue Divisional Officer was

saved. One of the officials tried to take photographs of the lorry in

question. He was beaten up by the accused persons. It is alleged

that the accused persons prevented the Revenue Divisional Officer

and his party from discharging their official duties.

B.A. No. 5315 of 2009 2

4. The activities of sand mafia are well known to the

general public. It is also well known that unauthorized removal of

sand is rampant in the State and that the persons who are

engaged in sand mining from rivers are very powerful. The people

are afraid of reporting any incident of stealthily removing sand

from rivers. Even the Revenue Officers are being terrorised by

sand mafia when such officers try to check the illegal activities of

sand mining. It is stated that the activities of the police and the

Revenue authorities are being closely watched by the sand mafia

and even before the police or Revenue authorities reach the

place, the offenders get the information regarding their arrival.

The revenue authorities discharge their duties under great stress

and strain, when they deal with the cases of illegal sand mining

and removal of sand. The Revenue Divisional Officer in the

present case is a lady officer. In spite of that, the allegation is

that the accused persons acted mercilessly towards her and her

team of officers.

5. In cases involving offences of this nature, if anticipatory

bail is granted, it would have the effect of strengthening the sand

B.A. No. 5315 of 2009 3

mafia and weakening the activities of the police and Revenue

Authorities.

6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations

levelled against the petitioners, I am of the view that the

petitioners are not entitled to the discretionary relief under

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed.

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

ln