IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 6225 of 2007()
1. M.ABDUL LATHEEF, S/O. MAMMED,
... Petitioner
2. P.C.MAMMU, S/O. ALAVI,
3. K.VENUGOPAL, S/O. NARAYANAN,
4. ABDUL NAZAR, S/O. SAIDALI,
5. SHAMSUDHEEN, S/O. MAMMADU,
6. SHIHABUDHEEN, S/O. ALAVI,
7. NOUFAL, S/O. ABU,
8. SAMAD, S/O. MAIMOONA,
9. ASSAINAR, S/O. MUHAMMED,
10. SHOUKATHALI M., S/O. SAIDU,
11. DAKHIR HUSSAIN, S/O. ABDULLA,
12. ANOOP, S/O. SIVAN,
13. MUHAMMED MUSTAFA, S/O. ABU,
14. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, S/O. MAMMAD,
15. MUSTAFA, S/O. HAMZA,
16. UNAIS, S/O. HASSAN,
17. MUHAMMED SADIQ,
18. BASHEER, S/O. UNNEEN,
19. NOUFAL, S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY,
20. IBRAHIM, S/O. ALAVI,
21. SAINUDHEEN, S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY,
22. YUNUS, S/O. TAJUDHEEN,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU S. NAIR
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :16/10/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
B.A.No.6225 of 2007
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of October, 2007
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused 7 to 29.
They are not named in the F.I.R. Only accused 1 to 6 are named in
the F.I.R. They face allegations for offences punishable, inter alia,
under Section 452 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations in the crime
registered is that a group of persons allegedly trespassed into the
residential building of the defacto complainant and attempted to
assault and belabuor him. The miscreants were allegedly involving
themselves in sand mining activities. They were inimical towards the
defacto complainant because they felt that the defacto complainant
was passing on information to the authorities about the sand mining
activities. The petitioners were not initially arrayed as accused by the
police. Later, the petitioners – accused 7 to 29 have been arrayed as
accused.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent. Only to satisfy the defacto complainant the
whole mass of persons in the locality have been arrayed as accused.
The petitioners have absolutely no direct involvement in the incident
that took place. They have been brought on the array of accused
unnecessarily. To avoid vexation to them, directions under Section
438 Cr.P.C may be issued. Appropriate conditions may be imposed, it
B.A.No.6225 of 2007 2
is further submitted.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.
The learned Public Prosecutor points out that earlier, the named
accused had come before this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. But
such prayer was turned down by this Court.
4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. Notwithstanding
the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor, I am persuaded to
issue directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C in favour of the petitioners.
I take note of the crucial difference that the petitioners have not been
named as accused initially and as many as 23 persons have been
specifically arrayed as accused. Appropriate conditions can of course
be imposed.
5. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The following
directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
i) The petitioners shall appear before the learned Magistrate
at 11 a.m on 23.10.07. They shall be enlarged on regular bail on their
executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only)
each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction
of the learned Magistrate;
ii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for
interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 3
p.m on 24.10.2007 and 25.10.2007 and thereafter between 10 a.m
B.A.No.6225 of 2007 3
and 12 noon on all Mondays and Fridays for a period of 2 months;
iii) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned
Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall
thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the
petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law as if those
directions were not issued at all;
iv) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender
on 23.10.07 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be released
from custody on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Five thousand only) each without any sureties undertaking to
appear before the learned Magistrate on 23.10.07.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-