IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2008 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1751 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.829/07 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION CRMP.658/2008 of DISTRICT COURT, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. ASHRAF C.A., AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. ABBAS, CHETTUMKUZHI, IZZETH NAGAR, MADHUR VILLAGE, HIDAYATH NAGAR P.O.,KASARAGOD DIST 2. C.K. HARIS, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. C.K. KUNHAMU, C.K. HOUSE, 4TH MILE,CHENGALA, MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, P.O. ALAMPADY. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NILESHWAR, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 1751 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 1 and 2. Altogether there are two accused persons. Crime was initially registered alleging the offence punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. Later, on realising that the victim had suffered fracture of nasal bone, allegation under Section 326 I.P.C. was also added. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. Application for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioners before the learned Sessions Judge was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are innocent and they may be enlarged on bail. Allegation under Section 326 I.P.C. is included subsequently without any justification, it is urged. The learned counsel has a further contention that the petitioners have, as a matter of fact, been arrested and enlarged on bail already by the B.A.No. 1751 of 2008 2 police. It is later that allegation under section 326 I.P.C. has been included and the present attempt is made to arrest the petitioners. Submissions to that effect were made before the learned Sessions Judge when the learned Sessions Judge considered the application for anticipatory bail, submits the counsel. The learned counsel submits that there is no need for any fresh arrest. At any rate, the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Prosecutor, after taking instructions, submits that though such a submission was made by the petitioners before the learned Sessions Judge there has in fact been no arrest and release of the petitioners in this crime earlier. In these circumstances they have to be arrested. The learned Prosecutor further submits that the victim has a fracture of the nasal bone, which fact was not known at the time of registration of the F.I.R. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. There is nothing to indicate that there was earlier arrest and release of the petitioners by the police. In the facts and circumstances of this case, this is a fit case where the B.A.No. 1751 of 2008 3 petitioners 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. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioners appear before the learned Magistrate and apply 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