IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2008 / 3RD MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 376 of 2008() ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN BA.8115/2007 Dated 02/01/2008 CRIME NO.544/07 OF BEKAL POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3 ------------------------------------------- 1. KHADIR MIRSHAD @ KAYINHI, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. ISMAIL, KIZHUR, KALANAD P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. ABDU RAHIMAN @ ANDURNHI, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. MOOSAN, KIZHUR, KALANAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. ASHRAF, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. SUBAIR, KIZHUR, KALANAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.IMTHIYAZ AHAMED SRI.SHIRAZ ABDULLA RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ S.I. OF POLICE, BEKAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 376 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2008 ORDER Second application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 1 to 3. They have come to this Court earlier seeking anticipatory bail. Their prayer was dismissed as per the order dated 2/1/08 in B.A.No.8115/07. 2. The petitioners have come to this Court again seeking anticipatory bail with a plea that certain vital facts were omitted to be brought to the notice of this Court when the earlier application for anticipatory bail was taken up for consideration. It is submitted now that a counter case has been registered as Crime No.547/07 of the very same Police Station wherein the de facto complainant in this crime is an accused and it is alleged that he has committed the offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.324 of the IPC. Inasmuch as B.A. No. 376 OF 2008 -: 2 :- the allegations and counter allegations are traded in respect of the same incident, a lenient view may be taken and anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioners, it is prayed. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that while it is true that a counter case has been registered, that crime is seen registered on 19/12/07 after the incident which took place on 15/12/07. Proper investigation is being conducted into both the crimes. But, at any rate, there are no circumstances, at the moment, to justify or warrant the invocation of the jurisdiction under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. The victim in this case has suffered grievous hurt and there is no reason to take a different view than the view which has already been taken on 2/1/08 that the petitioner must surrender and seek regular bail. Appropriate directions for expeditious disposal of such application for bail has also been incorporated in para-5 of the earlier order. 5. I am satisfied that this renewed prayer for anticipatory bail does not deserve to be granted. This bail application is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ B.A. No. 376 OF 2008 -: 3 :-