MUHAMMED SHAFEEQ Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3, involved in crime No.590/2018 of Mannarkkadu Police Station, Palakkad. The offences allegedly involved in the crime are those punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 452, 323, 324, 354 & 506(ii) r/w Section 149 IPC.

(2.) The case of the prosecution was that the son of the de facto complainant, is a friend of one of the accused in a murder case and therefore he was not in terms with the defacto complainant. On 24.08.2018 at about

(3.) 30 pm, the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of the common object trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and assaulted her sons. When she attempted to intervene in the incident, the maxy worn by her was torn and therefore it is alleged that the petitioners attempted to outrage her modesty. FIS was lodged by the de facto complainant before the Mannarkkad Police Station and accordingly the crime in question was registered. During the course of the investigation, the petitioners were arrested on 24.08.2018. All of therm were produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mannarkad and were remanded to Judicial Custody. Therefore, this application is moved by them to get regular bail. 3. Sri. Muhammaed Shafi.M, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are falsely implicated into the crime. He has invited the attention of the Court to Annexure.A3 which is the copy of FIR No. 589/2018 was registered on 24.08.2018 itself against the defacto complainant and others at the instance of the mother of the 2 nd petitioner herein. It is contended by the learned counsel that the case in question was registered by the de facto complainant herein to counterblast the criminal liability likely to arise from Annexure.A3. According to him, after getting crime No. 589/2018 registered that the present crime was registered at the instance of the de facto complainant. The learned counsel contended that some falsity is involved in the registration of the present crime and that is revealed from the belated registration. It is also contended by the counsel that the petitioners were taken into custody on 24.08.2018 and the material part of the investigation is over. Accordingly, the learned counsel pleaded for enlarging the petitioners on bail.