IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 542 of 2008(J) ----------------------------- CRIME 7/08 OF CHATHANNOOR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- JAYAPRAKASH @ ANI, S/O. RAJENDRA BABU, NDIYAVILA VEEDU, MEENAD EAST, CHATHANNOOR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ 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 31/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No. 542 OF 2008 A ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 31st day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner is the sole accused. He faces allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable under sections 452 and 324 IPC. The petitioner had allegedly attacked the de facto complainant with a dangerous weapon after trespassing into the residential building of the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant, it is now confirmed, has suffered injuries including a fracture. Report to include the offence under section 326 IPC has already been made before the learned Magistrate, it is submitted. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not the aggressor but was the victim of aggression. The complainant's allegation is that the petitioner, an autorikshaw driver, had attacked the de facto BA.542/08 : 2 : complainant on the simple reason/ground that the de facto complainant had scolded the petitioner, who did not accept his request to ply the vehicle as desired by the de facto complainant. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. I have considered all the relevant inputs. Though it is asserted that the petitioner is the victim of aggression and has suffered grievous injuries, there is absolutely nothing to show that any counter allegations have been made or that the petitioner had suffered any injury. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that the petitioner is not entitled to invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner must appear before the investigating officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the normal and ordinary course. 4. In the result, this petition is dismissed. Needless to BA.542/08 : 3 : say, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer or 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 appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks