IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH MAY 2008 / 23RD VAISAKHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3003 of 2008 ------------------------------------- (CRIME NO. 141/2008 OF KURUVILANGADU POLICE STATION) .............................................. PETITIONER ----------------- JESTIN RAJU, PONKUNNEL HOUSE, PATTITHANAM KARA, KANAKKARI VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK. KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN IDICULLA ABRAHAM SRI.MARTIN D.ALUMKARA RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KURUVILANGADU POLICE STATION, KURUVILANGADU KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/05/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. -------------------------------- Bail Application No. 3003 of 2008 -------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of May, 2008 O R D E R In this Petition filed under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. the petitioner, who is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 141/2008 of Kuruvilangad Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 452, 308, 323 and 294(b) read with Section 34 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory Bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. 3. Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case involving such grave offence. It is too early to accept the petitioner's contention that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. It is brought to my notice that the other accused were already released on bail and his application for anticipatory bail was rejected as per Annexure A1 order for the reason that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner was essential to recover the weapon used for inflicting the injury on the de-facto complainant. It is a fact that the weapon used for the commission of the offence was recovered on 28.03.2008 and also after investigation the final report is filed. B.A. No. 3003 OF 2008 2 That being the position, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted. There is no reason why the petitioner should not surrender before the magistrate concerned and seek regular bail. Accordingly, if the petitioner surrenders before the Magistrate concerned within two weeks from today and files an application for regular bail, the same shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day on which it is filed bearing in mind the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22). With the above observation, this Application is disposed of . V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. ttb