IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 270 of 2008(M) ----------------------------- CR.NO. 369/07 OF MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED --------------------------------------- MANI RASIN RAJ, AGED 28 YEARS, PONOTH HOUSE, MUNAMBAM P.O., KUZHIPPILLY. BY ADV. SMT.K.V.RESHMI RESPONDENTS: STATE ------------------ 1. S.I OF POLICE, MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 270 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that when the defacto complainant was taking his friend, injured one Rajesh, to the hospital in a car, those who attacked Rajesh in the earlier incident along with some others waylaid the defacto complainant and attacked him. He suffered injuries. The allegations against the accused persons, including the petitioner herein, who is the 4th accused, is that they attacked the defacto complainant armed with dangerous weapons. There are four named accused. Some others were also members of the unlawful assembly, it is alleged. The four accused, including the petitioner herein/A4, are named in the F.I.R. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner has not been arrested yet. He apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the B.A.No. 270 of 2008 2 petitioner is innocent. The petitioner was not at all involved in the earlier incident, in which the said Rajesh had suffered the injuries. Merely because of ill-will false and vexatious allegations are being raised against the petitioner herein also. It is prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the available indications clearly point to the complicity of the petitioner. The petitioner, as per the allegations, had a sword stick available with him. In these circumstances he may be directed to co- operate with the Investigators, surrender before the learned Magistrate or the police and then seek regular bail. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs and the submissions made at the Bar, I do not find 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. Allegations inviting culpability under Section 27 of the Arms Act are there in the F.I.R. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however B.A.No. 270 of 2008 3 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