IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 26TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 877 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 435 OF 2007 OF ANCHAL POLICE STATION PETITIONER --------------------------- SHIBI, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. SIVANANDAN PILLAI, SHIBU VILASAM, NARIKKAL, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.435 OF 2007 OF ANCHAL POLICE STATION). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 877 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 397 and 302 I.P.C. The allegations raised in that crime is that four unknown persons, identifiable by the defacto complainant, had on the night of 15.12.2007 gone to the house of the defacto complainant and had attempted to remove using force the jeep belonging to the defacto complainant, in respect of which a hire purchase agreement had been entered into. Seeing that their property was being forcibly removed, the defacto complainant, who is the wife of the deceased, as well as the deceased attempted to stop and deter the miscreants. The protest and resistance were ignored and the vehicle was taken away by force. In that attempt to take away the vehicle by force, it ran over the wife of the defacto complainant, who succumbed to the injuries suffered on the next B.A.No. 877 of 2008 2 day. Investigation is in progress. No person has formally been arrayed as accused. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. He has nothing to do with the incident at all. Totally false and vexatious allegations are now sought to be raised against the petitioner in a transparent attempt to exclude some others who possibly are responsible for the commission of the crime. The petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner apprehends that physical harm may be caused to him if he happens to go into police custody except through the court. He may be permitted to surrender before the Court before he is detained by the police. 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. Anticipatory bail can certainly be granted to a petitioner, who has not been formally arrayed as an accused. There can be no dispute on that proposition of law. The short question is whether, in the facts and circumstances of this case, such direction can or need be issued in favour of the petitioner. B.A.No. 877 of 2008 3 5. I find no merit in the claim of the petitioner. The learned Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused so far. But the needle of suspicion is pointed at him that he is one of the miscreants, who had allegedly indulged in the overt acts. He is a person who engages himself in the activity of forcibly reducing possession of vehicles in respect which finance is given. The petitioner has to be interrogated. Only if necessary, he shall be arrested. There is no basis in the apprehension of the petitioner that he will suffer physical harm. It is for the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer, co-operate with him and make himself available for interrogation. There is absolutely no circumstance which justifies the prayer of the petitioner to arm himself with an order of anticipatory bail. 6. I am of the opinion that it is not necessary to invoke the powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner now. He can appear before the Investigating Officer, make himself available for interrogation and in case he is arrested he can take resort to the ordinary course of law to claim bail under Section 437/439 Cr.P.C. B.A.No. 877 of 2008 4 7. This application is accordingly dismissed with the above observations. (R. BASANT) Judge tm