This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioners in Crime No.847 of 2014 of the Sulthan Bathery 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 11.09.2014 at about 11.15 p.m., the accused persons on account of their political enmity towards the defacto complainant formed themselves and unlawful assembly with deadly weapons like sword stick, iron rod etc. and inflicted injuries on him and thereby, all of them have committed offences punishable under Secs.143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 506(ii) and 308 of Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence and they are innocent of the same. They are falsely implicated in this case. Further, there was an incident happened earlier in respect of which, Crime No.832 of 2014 was registered by the same Police in respect of some incident happened between the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and Bharatiya Janantha Party workers and it is a counter blast to that case that a false case has been foisted. So he prayed for allowing the application.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application on the ground that investigation is still in progress, the weapons used in the incident are yet to be recovered and other persons to be identified as well.
5. Heard both sides and perused the records.
6. It is seen from the records that the above case was registered on the basis of the statement given by the defacto complainant who belongs to Bharatiya Janantha Party against the present petitioners and other identifiable persons alleging commission of the above said offences. It is true that earlier, on the basis of the statement given by one Akhil Mathew who belongs to Communist Party of India (Marxist), another crime was registered as Crime No.832 of 2014 against some accused persons alleging similar offences. The present defacto complainant is the 2nd accused in that case. That itself shows that there is political enmity and in retaliation of the earlier incident, the present incident happened. The names of the present petitioners have been specifically mentioned in the First Information Statement itself. Further, dangerous weapons like iron rods and sword stick etc. were used for committing the offence and custody of the petitioners are required for recovery of the same as well.
7. So considering the gravity of the offences, this Court feels that it is not a fit case where the power under Sec.438 of the Code to be invoked to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners in a case like this. The petitioners are not entitled to get anticipatory bail and the petition is liable to be rejected.
In the result the bail application is rejected.
If the petitioners surrender before the investigating officer and if the investigating officer after interrogation feels that their arrest is required, then record the arrest and produce the petitioners before the concerned Magistrate Court without any delay and on such production, it is open to the petitioners to move application for bail before the concerned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate is directed to consider and dispose of the bail application strictly in accordance with law.
Sd/-
K. RAMAKRISHNAN JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge