IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7062 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NUMBER 199/07 OF FEROKE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE (S): PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. MITHUNDAS V.T. S/O.SIVADASAN, AGED 20 "PAVITHRAM",B.C.ROAD, BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE-673015. 2. SUJIN.A.S/O.SURENDRAN, AGED 19, "DEVAKI",P.O.GOVINDAPURAM, KOZHIKODE-673016. 3. MANESH.K. AGED 20 "MANESH NIVAS", KACHERI KUNNU,P.O.PUKUNNU, KOZHIKODE-673013. 4. SHAMSHEEL AMEEN, "ZALLAQ"CHULLIYODE ROAD P.O.CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673020. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS SRI.SRINATH GIRISH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPRESENTING THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FEROKE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J ================== B.A.No.7062 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 19th day of November, 2008. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act. According to prosecution, petitioners were students of Veda Vyasa Institute of Technology. Petitioners ragged certain students of the institute and they also insisted to pay money. When they resisted, money was taken from their pocket by force. They were also beaten up by the petitioners. The Chairman of the institute filed a complaint based on which a crime is registered under Section 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that alleged incident happened on 17.1.2007 and petitioners are not studying in the said institute now. They are of aged 19-20 years. After the registration of crime, the matter was settled between the parties and agreements were executed. Those are produced as Annexure 1 to 4. Since the matter is settled, petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. Learned public prosecutor submitted that allegations made are serious in nature. He has no information regarding any B.A.No.7062 of 2008 -2- settlement. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I do not find any ground to grant anticipatory bail in an offence of this nature. Anticipatory bail is not a remedy which can be granted to a person on the basis of a compromise or settlement. Whether the parties enter into compromise or not, the court can independently take a decision considering nature of allegation etc., whether to grant anticipatory bail or not. It is a discretionary remedy and the benefit of the provision which cannot be extended merely because parties agree between each other and settle the matter. In a case of this nature, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that direction may be issued allowing the petitioners to surrender before court. For an accused to surrender before court, no permission would be required from the court. Even without any permission, petitioners will be at liberty to surrender. There can be no doubt that it is a case where petitioner must surrender before Investigating Officer or the court without any delay. The Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE rhs/-