IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 12TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 572 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NOT REGISTERED PETITIONER --------------------------- DINESH KUMAR, S/O.SUDHAKARA, NEAR LADIES HOSTEL, ANANAGOOR, KASARAGODE. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGODE POLICE STATION. 2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 572 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner apprehends arrest on the allegation that he has committed non-bailable offence. The details were not known to him. Because the police were making enquiries about him, he has rushed to this Court seeking anticipatory bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. In these circumstances he may be saved of the undeserved trauma of arrest and detention, submits the counsel. 2. The learned Prosecutor, after taking instructions, submits that it is true that a crime has been registered as Crime No. 545 of 2007 of Kasargode police station, inter alia, under Sections 452 and 427 I.P.C. on the basis of the complaint filed before the police by the defacto complainant, a woman. She stated that when she came to her house on 16.8.2007 at about 5 p.m., she found two persons indulging in acts of violence and B.A.No. 572 of 2008 2 mischief inside her house. They had caused extensive damage to the house and destruction to the articles in the house. Those miscreants, when they saw the defacto complainant, went away in a motor cycle, the number of which was noted by the defacto complainant. She did not know the miscreants. Crime was registered. No person was named as the accused. The Investigating Officer made efforts to trace the owner of the bike. The owner was traced. While so, the defacto complainant saw these miscreants in the bus stand. She allegedly informed a neighbour of hers, who was available in the bus stand when these miscreants were there. That person knew the miscreants. The defacto complainant along with the neighbour went to the police station and gave information about the details of the two miscreants. The petitioner has been arrayed as the first accused. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner has not been arrested yet. 3. The learned Prosecutor submits that in these circumstances there is every reason to strongly suspect the involvement of the petitioner. He has to be interrogated. The police have been able to trace the motive also. They have a quarrel with the son of the petitioner, aged about 23 years. It is the animosity between them that B.A.No. 572 of 2008 3 was allegedly prompted the miscreants to attack the house of the defacto complainant. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am unable to perceive any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This I am satisfied is a fit case where the petitioner 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 ordinary and usual course. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies 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) tm Judge B.A.No. 572 of 2008 4