IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1010 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.62/08 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION PETITIONER --------------------------- 1. KABEER, S/O. ABOOBACKER H/N 15/604,KALLATTINGAL HOUSE NARIKUTHI PALAKKAD. 2. YOUNIS,S/O,. FASAL, POLLAKAD, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No.1010 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 2 and 3. Altogether, there are 10 accused persons. The petitioners, along with the co-accused, were found under suspicious circumstances on 19/1/08. Their presence under suspicious circumstances aroused doubts in the mind of the detecting officer that the offence under Sec.399 of the IPC is committed by them. He could apprehend only one of the accused persons. He was already arrested and has been enlarged on regular bail as per the order dated 11/2/08 in B.A. No.801/08. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners have not been arrested so far. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that B.A. No.1010 of 2008 -: 2 :- the petitioners are absolutely innocent. In any view of the matter, it may not be held that the petitioners are guilty of any offence under Sec.399 of the IPC. No specific allegations of criminal antecedents are raised against the petitioners, it is submitted. In any view of the matter, the petitioners may now be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners is absolutely essential for a proper investigation of the case. The petitioners do not deserve the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. in their favour, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am unable to perceive any features in this case that can justify or warrant the invocation of the jurisdiction under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. This, I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor, is an eminently fit case where the petitioners must surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the usual and normal course. 5. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with B.A. No.1010 of 2008 -: 3 :- the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seek bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge