IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 58 of 2008() --------------------------- CRIME NO. 140/07 OF AMBALAPUZHA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 ---------------------------------------- ANIL KUMAR @ ANIL ,S/O. PARAMESWARAN CHARUVUKALA HOUSE, THAKAZHY PANCHAYATH ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 58 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the third accused. Altogether there are four accused persons arrayed. The crime is registered, inter alia, under Section 392 r/w. 34 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations is that on the midnight of 19.4.2007 when the defacto complainant was proceeding on his motor cycle, he was attacked by four young persons, who came in two motor cycles armed with damgerpis weapons. They snatched away his gold chain, bracelet, ring, mobile phone etc. as also the currency notes of a total of Rs.600/- which he was having in his possession. The victim had no clue of the identity of the miscreants. He described them as four persons aged below 30 years, who came in motor cycles. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. 2. The Investigating Officer received discreet information that some miscreants were residing in the house of the first B.A.No. 58 of 2008 2 accused. He conducted a raid. The 4th accused was arrested and the other three accused ran away. The 4th accused was arrested on 9.5.2007 and he was interrogated. His interrogation helped the police to resolve the mysery of the crime. It was accused 1 to 4, who had attacked the defacto complainant. A report to array the petitioner as an accused was filed on 11.5.2007. He apprehends imminent arrest. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and that he has been unnecessarily and unjustifiably arrayed as an accused. 4. The learned Prosecutor opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that the interrogation of the 4th accused has revealed the complicity of the petitioner and other co-accused. The robbed articles are with the petitioner and the other co-accused. They have not been recovered. Attempt must be made to recover the stolen articles. The petitioner may not be permitted to arm himself with an order of anticipatory bail at this stage, submits the learned Prosecutor. 5. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I find no reason at the moment B.A.No. 58 of 2008 3 to assume that the confession of the co-accused is incorrect or falsely concocted by the Investigating Officer. I am satisfied that there are no 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 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) Judge tm B.A.No. 58 of 2008 4