SADHIKHALI P. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners in B.A No.9467 of 2019 are accused 1 to 5 and 7 to 11, the petitioner in B.A No.9475 of 2019 is the 6 th accused in Crime No.304 of 2019 of Areekode Police Station, for having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Section 143 , 147 , 148 , 353 , 332 read with 149 of Indian Penal Code . It is pointed out that there was yet another crime against some of the petitioners as Crime No.305 of 2019 at the same Police Station, for having allegedly inflicted injuries and for having committed offences punishable under Section 143 , 147 , 148 , 341 , 323 , 324 , 308 read with Section 149 of Indian penal code.

(2.) Consequent to an election in the Government ITI, at Areekode, there was a conflict between the two groups of students and supporters. Which turned nasty, which resulted in registering of Crime No.305 of 2019. The police intervened and asked the petitioners to evacuate. The 6 th accused allegedly threw a stone at the police, causing injury to one of the police men. He was hospitalized. Thereby, the petitioners, committed the offences. It is pointed out that the 1 st petitioner is an Advocate practicing in Manjeri Bar, and that he was himself very seriously injured due to police assault, as is evident from the photograph produced as Annexure A4. The petitioners would contend that it is out of political rivalry that the two cases happened to be registered. That apart from the sole incident of allegedly throwing of stone by the 6 th accused, there is no other specific allegation of attacking the Police Authorities by the accused interfering with their administration of justice. The petitioners admittedly do not have any criminal antecedents. The injury allegedly sustained by the Police Officer is not life threatening, even though he has been treated in a Government hospital. There is nothing to be recovered and custodial interrogation of the petitioners, does not appear to be essential for the investigation. There is also no apprehension that the petitioners may abscond because their whereabouts and residences are known to the Investigating Officer and there is no reason to why they should abscond.

(3.) Under the circumstances, I do not find it necessary to incarcerate the petitioners for any reason. They are, therefore, entitled for anticipatory bail. In the event of their arrest, they shall be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like amount for the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and also a condition that they shall appear before the Investigating Officer for facilitating the investigation and for interrogation, on every Monday between 9 a.m and 12 noon, till further orders or till filing of the final report, whichever is earlier.