Satheesh Kumar v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2015/25TH ASHADHA, 1937 Bail Appl..No. 3012 of 2015 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 312/2015 OF WADAKKANCHERY POLICE STATION,THRISSUR DISTRICT --------------------- APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.6:

------------------------------------------ SATHEESHKUMAR, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNARAVU, KALLURMADAM HOUSE, KANJIRAKODE.

BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADVS. SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

----------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.S.SREEJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-07-2015, ALONG WITH BA.NO. 3014/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

---------------------- B.A. Nos.3012 and 3014 of 2015 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of July 2015

O R D E R

Petition filed under Sec.438 Cr.P.C.

2. Petitioners are accused in Crime No.312 of 2015 of Wadakkancherry Police station registered for the offences under Secs.109, 120B, 143, 147, 148, 380, 427 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. On 08.04.2015, certain political parties observed a harthal. They insisted the shop owners to close down their shops. But the victim in this case opened his shop. It is alleged by the prosecution that the petitioners along with the co-accused entered into a conspiracy and pursuant to it, they trespassed into the shop room of the victim, assaulted him, committed theft of a mobile phone and committed mischief causing a loss of Rs.1 lakh to the victim.

3. Heard both sides.

4. I have perused the Case Diary. The involvement of the petitioners in the incident is clear from the materials collected by the Police. They had no

B.A. Nos.3012 and 3014 of 2015 2 respect for the rights of others; nor had they respect the law also. They wanted to impose their will on others who were exercising their rights. Such persons are not entitled to anticipatory bail.

In the result, these bail applications are dismissed. Sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge