IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2008 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1539 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME 37/08 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 2 & 3 ---------------------------------------------- 1. MUHAMMED AJEER @ AJEER, S/O.SULAIMAN, AGED 25 YEARS, CHAPPARAPPADAVU, KOOVERI AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. IQBAL.P., S/O.MAJEED, AGED 34 YEARS, CHAPPARAPPADAVU, KOOVERI AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, (CRIME NO. 37/08 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT), REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No. 1539 OF 2008 D ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 12th day of March, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 3. They face allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under sections 324 and 379 read with 149 IPC. Three accused persons including the petitioners are named in the FIR. The other accused named in the FIR i.e. A1, has already been arrested and granted regular bail. Altogether there are eight accused persons. The alleged incident took place on the morning of 14.1.08. There was tension in the locality consequent to disputes between the followers of the IUML and the CPI(M). The petitioners belong to the IUML. They had allegedly attacked the de facto complainant, a person owing allegiance to the CPI(M) in a bus in which he was travelling on that morning. He was assaulted and the money kept in his pocket was taken away by using force. Crime has BA.1539/08 : 2 : been registered. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent. The de facto complainant belongs to the CPI(M). He has political clout and influence. Because of such political clout, false and vexatious allegations are raised against his political opponents. Police is only obliging the de facto complainant. In these circumstances, the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail. They may be saved of the trauma of arrest and detention, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that all the available indications do clearly point to the complicity of the petitioners and they are named in the FIR also. In these circumstances, there is no justification in the prayer for invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. The petitioners may be directed to surrender before the learned Magistrate or the investigating officer and then seek regular bail, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. BA.1539/08 : 3 : 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am satisfied that there are no features in this case which would justify 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 in the normal and ordinary course. 5. In the result, this petition is dismissed. Needless to say, 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, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks