High Court Kerala High Court

A.P.Abdul Majeed vs State Of Kerala on 30 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
A.P.Abdul Majeed vs State Of Kerala on 30 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4730 of 2008()



1. A.P.ABDUL MAJEED
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :30/07/2008

 O R D E R
                            K.HEMA, J.
                   ------------------------------
                      B.A. No.4730 OF 2008
                   ------------------------------
               Dated this the 30th day of July, 2008


                             O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147,

148, 353, 427 read with Section 149 I.P.C. According to the

prosecution, on 19.07.2008 while the Cluster Meeting of the

teachers was going on, certain persons marched into the place

where meeting was held and assaulted the teachers and

destroyed the controversial text book, and a crime was registered

under Sections 143, 147, 148, 353, 427 read with Section 149

I.P.C. They obstructed the teachers from proceeding with their

meeting, in the course of the official duty.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

name of none of the petitioners are mentioned in the F.I.R. But

the petitioners who are leaders of a political party are dragged

into the offence and they are falsely implicated on political

reasons. It is also submitted that they may not be required for

any custodial interrogation.

B.A.4730/2008
2

4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor

submitted that the petitioners are accused nos.5 to 14 in the

crime. There are altogether 50 accused involved in the offence,

out of which, the petitioners are accused nos. 5 to 14. Their

identity is revealed in the investigation and they are required for

custodial interrogation and for the purpose of identifying them by

the witnesses. Since investigation is going on, if anticipatory bail

is granted to the petitioners at this stage, it will adversely affect

the investigation, it is submitted.

I am satisfied of the submissions made. Only because the

petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. it may not be possible to

say that they are innocent. The persons who are implicated as

accused will be required for interrogation and identification by

witnesses. Hence it may not be proper to grant anticipatory bail

to the petitioners in an offence of this nature.

The petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE

pac