High Court Kerala High Court

Shameer vs State Of Kerala Through The on 19 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Shameer vs State Of Kerala Through The on 19 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 5461 of 2008()


1. SHAMEER, S/O.ABDUL SALAM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :19/09/2008

 O R D E R
                             K.HEMA, J.
                    ------------------------------
                       B.A. No.5461 OF 2008
                    ------------------------------
           Dated this the 19th day of September, 2008


                              O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. According to the prosecution, petitioner along with

other accused formed into an unlawful assembly armed with

deadly weapons committed rioting and in furtherance of the

common object of the unlawful assembly, committed house

trespass by entering into a shop room and committed mischief. A

crime was registered under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 427

read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a

leader of the DYFI was murdered by his political opponents and

on the date of his funeral, there was a peaceful procession by the

members of the DYFI in the area. Merely because the petitioner

is the local leader of the DYFI, he is falsely implicated in the

offence. The incident happened on the funeral day.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the

petitioner may be directed to surrender before the Investigating

B.A.5461 of 2008
2

Officer and subject to this, he has no objection in granting

anticipatory bail.

On hearing both sides, I am not inclined to grant

anticipatory bail to petitioner. The petitioner is an accused in 5

crimes of similar nature committed on the same day at different

places and in one of the cases (crime No.682 of 2008) offence

under Section 436 of I.P.C. is also involved. A shop room was

said allegedly set fire to. Though it is alleged that the petitioner is

implicated only because he is a leader, there is only a mere

assertion.

The petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE

pac