The accused Nos.1,3 and 4 in Crime No.591 of 2014 of Tanur Police Station, Malappuram seek pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the apprehension of arrest as part of investigation. 2. The prosecution case is that in connection with some dispute regarding the Lok Sabha Election on 10.4.2014, between two political fractions, the petitioners and the co-accused assaulted the de facto complainant Muhammed Asif and his friend Haris as part of a pre- arranged plan, and they inflicted injuries on their body with weapons, with the knowledge of consequence that the injuries may cause death. In the said incident of assault, the said Mohammed Asif sustained a serious incised wound of 15x4x3 cm with soft tissue and muscle cut over the anterior part of the left lower lateral chest wall. The said injury was in fact inflicted by the 1st petitioner herein, as revealed from the prosecution records. The crime was registered on the first information statement given by the injured Mohammed Asif. The petitioners now seek pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the apprehension of arrest by the police.
2. The case diary along with report of the Investigating Officer is produced by the learned Public Prosecutor, who opposed the application.
3. On hearing both sides and on a perusal of the case diary, I find the absolute necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioners, as part of investigation. It was submitted that there is nothing definite in the First Information Statement or the other materials to implicate the petitioners 2 and 3. On a perusal of the case diary including the first information statement, I find definite statements against the petitioners 2 and 3 and the 3rd petitioner was identified during investigation as one of the identifiable persons mentioned by the first informant. The injury sustained by the de facto complainant in the incident is not simple as the petitioners would say. It is a long incised wound on the chest. In such a situation, it cannot be said that Section 308 of I.P.C was incorporated in the F.I.R unnecessarily or baselessly or on some hypothetical statements. It is a matter for decision on trial. Anyway, let the petitioners be effectively and thoroughly interrogated by the investigating officer to detect and find out the role of each of them in the alleged incident, and also their complicity individually and collectively. Without and before being effectively interrogated, these petitioners cannot be released on bail.
In the result, this application for pre-arrest bail is dismissed.
ma /True copy/ Sd/- P.UBAID JUDGE P.S to Judge