Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 34767
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ASHOK MENON, J
BIJU PETER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./870/2021
SRI.C.S.SUMESH, SMT.V.SREEJA -PP
Anticipatory bail can be denied when serious allegations against the applicants involve obstructing public servants and causing injury.
Headnote:
Bail - Anticipatory Bail Application - Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 438 - Indian Penal Code - Sections 294(b), 353, 506(i), 332 - The court denied anticipatory bail due to serious allegations of obstructing a public servant and causing injury to a police officer.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants, accused in a case of obstructing election duties and injuring a police officer, sought anticipatory bail, claiming false implication and no prior criminal record.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations of stone-pelting indicated a serious attempt to deter public servants, thus justifying the denial of anticipatory bail.
Issues: Whether the applicants are eligible for anticipatory bail given the allegations of serious offences, including causing injury to a police officer while obstructing election duty.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the severity of the allegations, including intent to cause hurt to a public servant, outweighed the applicants' claims of being falsely implicated.
Final Decision: The applicants' request for anticipatory bail was denied.
O R D E R
Dated this the 10th day of February 2021 ...
This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was heard through Video Conference.
2. The applicants are accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.2917 of 2020 of Kundara Police Station, Kollam District for having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 353, 506(i) r/w.Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ( IPC ).
3. The prosecution case in brief is that, on
7.12.2021 at about 2.30 p.m. with intention to deter the Election Presiding Officer in a booth at Karmalagiri auditorium from performing his duty, the applicants in furtherance of common intention, abused at him, and thereafter, pelted stone at him while he was engaged in removal of posters of candidates in the local body elections which was pasted in the vicinity of the polling booths in contravention of Rules. As a result of pelting stones by the applicants, one police officer got injured. The applicants state that the allegations are not true and that they had nothing to do with the alleged act of pelting stones at the police officer or the presiding officer of the election and they do not have any criminal antecedents as well and just because the motor cycle of one of the applicants was found in the vicinity of that place they have been implicated in a false case. They apprehend arrest and, therefore, they are approaching this Court seeking anticipatory bail.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned public prosecutor.
5. Going by the allegations in the F.I.R it is explicit that the offence under Section 332 of the IPC is also attracted apart from Section 353 IPC because the applicants had pelted stones with intention to cause hurt to one of the police men with intention to deter public servant from discharging their duties. In the said circumstances, they are not definitely entitled to the extraordinary and exceptional remedy of anticipatory bail.
Therefore, the applicants are directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks from today. In the event of their arrest, after interrogation and recovery, if any, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate on the same day itself. Any application for regular bail preferred by the applicants before the jurisdictional magistrate shall be considered and the same preferably disposed of on the same day.
