IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2008 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1908 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.55/08 OF PUTHENVELIKKARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4 ------------------------------------------- 1. SHIBU, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O SASANKAN, PANIKKASSERY VEEDU, PUTHENVELIKKARA, PARAVUR TALUK. 2. MANIKANDAN @ KRISHNAKUMAR, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O MANI, MULLANPARAMBIL VEEDU, PUTHENVELIKKARA, PARAVUR TALUK. 3. GEORGEKUTTY, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O THOMAS, THADIKARAN VEEDU, PUTHENVELIKKARA, PARAVUR TALUK. 4. SHERIOUS @ SHERAPPAN, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O THOMAS, PADAMADAN HOUSE, PUTHENVELIKKARA, PARAVUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SAJEEV RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUTHENVELIKKARA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 1908 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 1 to 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, submits that the 3rd petitioner/the 3rd accused has subsequently been arrested and enlarged on bail by the learned Magistrate and, in these circumstances, the petition in so far as the 3rd petitioner is concerned is not being pressed now. 2. Altogether, there are 10 accused persons. Four of them i.e., the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. There are 6 other accused also who are not named. The alleged incident took place on 3/3/08 and 5.30 p.m. On account of prior animosity, the accused persons, who came in 6 motor-cycles, allegedly trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant B.A. No. 1908 of 2008 -: 2 :- and indulged in wanton acts of violence, mischief and damage was caused to the building. Injuries, though only simple, were caused to the victims. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. False allegations are being raised against them. They may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that all available indications point to the complicity of the petitioners. Victims have suffered injuries. The premises had suffered damage to the tune of Rs.6,000/-. The scene mahazar prepared bears eloquent testimony to the nature of the damage caused to the building. In any view of the matter, the petitioners may be directed to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. There are absolutely no circumstances justifying or warranting the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C., submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am satisfied B.A. No. 1908 of 2008 -: 3 :- that this is a fit case where the petitioner must be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the normal and usual course. 6. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seek 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 and expeditiously. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge