IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 25TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 719 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.52/08 OF VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION PETITIONER : ACCUSED ------------------------ 1. AJAYAN, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.VELAYI, VALA HOUSE, THOZHIYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. 2. ANEESH, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY POOZHIKUNNATH HOUSE, THOZHIYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. 3. RASHEED, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.ABOOBACKER, MALIYEKKAL HOUSE, THOZHIYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 719 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 1, 3 and 4. In the FIR, no person is named as an accused. Four persons are shown as accused in the FIR. The incident is a sequel to an earlier skirmish inside a toddy shop. Two persons were sitting in the toddy shop consuming liquor. The de facto complainant also reached there. Those two persons teased an old person. The de facto complainant allegedly questioned their conduct and advised them not to do that. There was a push and pull. They went away from the toddy shop. Later the accused persons came together. The de facto complainant apprehended danger and attempted to run away from the scene of the crime. The miscreants followed him. He was attacked with swords. He suffered serious B.A. No. 719 OF 2008 -: 2 :- injuries – though not legally grievous injuries. Investigation is in progress. In the course of investigation, accused 1 to 4 have been arrayed as accused. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. The 2nd accused has already been arrested. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. In any view of the matter, it cannot lightly be assumed that the persons other than the one who actually inflicted injures have any contumacious or culpable role to play in the attack though it is vaguely alleged that the de facto complainant ran and those who came after him inflicted the injures. There is absolutely no satisfactory material to come to the conclusion that the petitioners were the ones who had run after the de facto complainant or that they had shared any common intention/common object with the one who allegedly inflicted the injuries. Anticipatory bail may, in these circumstances, be granted to the petitioners, it is prayed. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the available indications clearly reveal a very serious crime. The learned Public Prosecutor has read over to me the nature of the injuries suffered by the injured – long incised injuries. The petitioners have not been named in the FIR. But in the course of B.A. No. 719 OF 2008 -: 3 :- investigation, their complicity has been ascertained. The 2nd accused has already been arrested and his confession statement has also been recorded, it is submitted. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor, in these circumstances, submits that the petitioners may be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and then seek regular bail. There are no circumstances which can justify or warrant the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. 5. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. All the relevant inputs have been considered by me and I am unable to perceive any features in this case which can justify or warrant the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor that this is a fit case where the petitioners must surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 6. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seek bail, B.A. No. 719 OF 2008 -: 4 :- 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