This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the 3rd accused in Crime No.545 of 2014 of Pozhiyoor Police station under Sec.438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' for short). 2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that, on 12.09.2014 at about 11.00 p.m., the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and when they were engaged in some quarrel and the defacto complainant and others interfered as Police officers at about 1.00 a.m., they were attacked and prevented them from discharging their duty and thereby all of them have committed the offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 149 and 332 of Indian Penal Code .
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and infact on 12.09.2014 in connection with a civil dispute, the Police conducted lathi charge in which, some persons sustained injuries and when they anticipated that they are likely to be implicated in a case, they falsely registered a case on the next day. The 1st accused and the 2nd accused are the plaintiff and defendants in the civil suit in respect of that property. So he has been falsely implicated in the case and he prayed for allowing the application.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application on the ground that the investigation is still in progress and the petitioner is also involved in the case.
5. Heard both sides and perused the case diary file.
6. It is seen from the case diary file that, on the basis of the statement given by the defacto complainant, a Police Sub Inspector, on 13.09.2014 at 1.15 a.m., a crime was registered as Crime No.545 of 2014 of the Pozhiyoor Police station under Secs.143, 147, 149 and 332 of Indian Penal Code against two named persons and six other identifiable persons. It is also seen from the Case Diary filed that accused nos.1 and 2 named in the First Information Report were arrested from the spot at the same time and they were released on bail later when they were produced before the Court. It is also seen from the report of the investigating officer that another crime was registered as Crime No.544 of 2014 of the same Police station under Sec.160 of Indian Penal Code against the same eight accused persons who are arrayed as accused in this case also. During investigation, it was revealed that the present petitioner also involved in the crime and he has been arrayed as the 3rd accused in the case.
6. Considering the fact that accused nos.1 and 2 were granted bail by the same Court, the petitioner can also surrender before the concerned Court and move for regular bail. I do not think that it is a fit case where the power under Sec.438 of the Code has to be invoked to grant anticipatory bail. The petitioner can either surrender before the investigating officer or before the Court concerned.
7. This Court feels that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and the petition is liable to be rejected.
In the result, the bail application is rejected.
Sd/-
K. RAMAKRISHNAN JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge