HARIDAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in B.A No.2782 of 2016 are the accused Nos.10 and 19 in Crime No.585/2016 of the Kottarakara Police Station registered under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452,294 (b), 114, 323, 324, 353, 332, 427 and 307 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(2)(e) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act. (P.D.P.P. Act), and the petitioners in B.A No.2854 of 2016 are the accused Nos.7 and 17 in the said crime. All the petitioners seek regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

(2.) The prosecution case is that at about 11.45 p.m. on 7.3.2016, a mob consisting of so many persons attacked the Kottarakara Police Station and inflicted injuries on the body of so many police personnel. The accused Nos.7 to 9 and 11 to 17 made application for regular bail before this Court as B.A Nos.2213/2016 and 2384/2016. As per the common order dated 29.3.2016, this Court granted regular B.A Nos. 2782 and 2854 of 2016 bail to the accused Nos.8, 9 and 11 to 16 on certain conditions. The accused Nos.7 and 17 were denied bail on the ground that they are involved in some other crime. It is submitted that those are crimes relating to some political clashes. The accused No.7 has been in judicial custody since 8.3.2016 and the accused No.17 has been in judicial custody since 11.03.2016. The accused Nos.10 and 19 who are the petitioners in B.A No.2782 of 2016 have been in judicial custody since 22.03.2016.

(3.) On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the materials, I find that the Police has gone a long way of investigation, or that investigation is practically over. It appears that the offence under Section 307 I.PC was incorporated in the F.I.R by the police on the basis of some hypothetical statement. That the injured persons are police men, is also one of the reasons for incorporating such a section in the F.I.R. It is a fact that some police personnel had sustained injuries in the alleged incident. It appears that the persons who exactly committed the offence, are yet to be clearly identified. Anyway, in the present B.A Nos. 2782 and 2854 of 2016 circumstances where investigation is almost over, and some of the accused are already granted bail by this Court, I am inclined to grant bail to the these petitioners also on certain conditions. In the result, these petitions are allowed. Accordingly, the petitioners in these two bail applications are granted bail on the following conditions.