IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 10TH APRIL 2008 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 2231 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME 360/08 OF KODUNGALLUR POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. SUJESH K.S., S/O. SUBRAMANIAN, KATTEKULAM HOUSE, THUMBOOR (P.O). 2. SUNIL SUBRAN, S/O. E.P. SUBRAN, ERUMATHADATHIL HOUSE, KOTTANELLUR (P.O). 3. SHIMNAD A.G., S/O. GOPINATHAN A.A., AKKILIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARNIKULANGARA (P.O) 4. SOORAJ K.A., S/O. APPUKUTTAN, KATTIL HOUSE, ASHTAMICHIRA (P.O). 5. VIPIN K.J., S/O. JANARDHANAN, KALADY HOUSE, ASHTAMICHIRA (P.O). 6. TINESH, S/O. KRISHNANKUTTY K.V., KALAYANPARAMHBIL HOUSE, VELLANI (P.O). 7. MOHAMMED SHABIR, S/O. C.M. BASHEER, CHOOLAKKADAVIL HOUSE, KARUPADANNA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.A.S.SABU SRI.C.U.SANGEETH SRI.RAFEEK. V.K. RESPONDENTS: STATE: ------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.S.U.NAZER THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/04/2008, ALONG WITH BA.2258/08 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. Nos. 2231 and 2258 OF 2008 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 10th day of April, 2008 O R D E R These applications are for anticipatory bail. Petitioners, who belong to different fractions, face allegations in two crimes, both registered under section 308 IPC about an alleged incident which took place on 27.3.08 in which the followers of the SFI and AISF were found on the two sides of the battle line in a college where the annual day celebrations took place. Allegations and counter allegations have been raised by the rival contestants. Police have registered crimes under section 308 read with 149 IPC in both cases. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are not guilty of any offences. They try to place the blame at the doors of the other. False allegations BA.2231&2258/08 : 2 : are raised against the petitioners in these two cases, it is submitted. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application of both the set of petitioners and contends that there are adequate materials to indicate the culpability of the petitioners for the more serious offences punishable under section 308 IPC. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that at any rate, there are no circumstances justifying or warranting the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of either of the two contestants. It is for them now to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor has taken me through the nature of injuries suffered by the victims in both cases. 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 BA.2231&2258/08 : 3 : 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, these petitions are 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