Kannur: When the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court in Kannur denied bail to five Kerala Students Union (KSU) workers accused of assaulting Health Minister Veena George at Kannur railway station, the reason it cited was that some of the accused have criminal antecedents and that the offences alleged are grave and serious in nature.

Issuing the order, JFMC-I Judge E V Raphael noted that Accused Nos 1, 3 and 5- Athul MC, Bithul Balan and Mubas H- are involved in other criminal cases.

Athul have a case registered against him at Panoor Police Station under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including charges related to unlawful assembly, assault, criminal intimidation and offences involving weapons. Bithul faces charges at the Dharmadam Police Station linked to physical altercations and public disturbances. Mubas is accused in a case with charges alleging unlawful assembly, rioting, and acts allegedly endangering public safety.

The court said these antecedents weighed against granting bail at a time when the investigation is still in progress.

The case pertains to an incident on February 25, when the protesters waved black flags and demanded the Minister's resignation as she arrived at the railway station to travel to Thiruvananthapuram.

According to the prosecution, the accused attacked the Minister on her neck using a dangerous weapon with the intention of killing her. The prosecution also alleged criminal conspiracy. The five have been charged with attempt to murder, use of a dangerous weapon, unlawful assembly, criminal intimidation, obstructing a public servant from discharging official duties, and provisions of the Railways Act.

The defence argued that the charge of attempt to murder would not stand, as no weapon was recovered during the body search, from the protest site or from the place of arrest. It submitted that the accused were arrested immediately, leaving no opportunity to hide or dispose of any weapon.

However, the court rejected the defence arguments, observing that the offences alleged are "serious in nature" and that releasing the accused at this stage could hamper the investigation. The Investigating Officer had expressed apprehension that the accused might abscond, influence witnesses or commit similar offences if granted bail.

The Magistrate concluded that it was not "fit and proper" to release the accused on bail and dismissed the application.

Meanwhile, the Railway Police Inspector informed the court that the probe is still at a preliminary stage and that only after recording the Minister's statement would the police be able to ascertain the nature of the weapon allegedly used.