IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1311 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 60/08 OF ENATHU POLICE STATION CRMP.380/2008 of DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- SHYJUMON P., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. PARAMESWARAN, MANJU BHAVAN, ENATHU MURI, ENATHU VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.SAJJU.S SRI.B.BALRAJ RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 1311 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of March, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 332 I.P.C. The alleged incident took place on 11.2.2008. The petitioner was plying an unauthorised passenger service along the route. A K.S.R.T.C. bus was also operating in the same route. The petitioner allegedly overtook the K.S.R.T.C bus and stopped his vehicle obstructing the progress of the K.S.R.T.C. bus. He got out of the vehicle and allegedly dragged the KSRTC bus driver out of the bus and assaulted him. 2. The crux of the allegations is that the petitioner is dissatisfied with the fact that the KSRTC bus was stopping at all bus stops diminishing his chances of getting passengers. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. B.A.No. 1311 of 2008 2 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not deserve to endure the trauma of arrest and incarceration. He may now be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 4. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that there are no circumstances justifying or warranting invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner may be directed to surrender before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course, submits the Prosecutor. 5. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am unable to perceive any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This I agree with the learned Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioner must resort to the ordinary and normal procedure of appearing before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the usual course. B.A.No. 1311 of 2008 3 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm