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. 1851 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.38/08 OF VELLARADA POLICE STATION : PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 3,5 & 6 -------------------------------------------- 1. GEORGE, THEKKUPARA, MOONGODU, AMBOORI VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. MOSES, S/O.THOMAS, KURIYANVILA VEEDU, FATHIMA NAGAR (PO), KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. 3. ASOKAN, S/O.MUTHAYYAN, ASOK BHAVAN, THEKKUPARA, MOONGODU, AMBOORI VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE 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.1851 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused 3, 5 and 6. Altogether there are 14 accused persons. Accused 1 to 4 are named in the F.I.R. Accused 2 and 4 have already been arrested. Accused persons face allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 307, 447 and 326 I.P.C. Allegations are raised under the Arms Act also. There was a property dispute between the rival groups. The accused persons were members of an unlawful assembly and had unleashed an attack on the victim. Chopper, swords etc. were used for commission of the offence. They allegedly trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and indulged in wanton acts of violence and mischief. 3 persons suffered injuries and one of them suffered a fracture also. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. Accused 5 and 6, ie. petitioners 2 and 3 have not been named in the F.I.R. The petitioners may, in these circumstances, be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. B.A.No.1851 of 2008 2 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public prosecutor submits that the allegations are grave. The petitioners had embarked on deliberate culpable conduct after prior design. There are no circumstances whatsoever justifying or warranting the invocation of the discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The nature of injuries suffered by the victim recorded in the wound certificate has been read over to me. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am not persuaded to agree that there are any features in this case which can justify or warrant the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. This, I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor , is a fit case where the petitioners must appear before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail. 5. This application is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but I may hasten to observe that if the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer or 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 appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- B.A.No.1851 of 2008 3