IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2008 / 14TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 7899 of 2007(S) ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 247/06 OF VILAPPILSALA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED --------------------------------------- SHIBU ROY, S/O.APPU, NETTARATHALAKKAL VEEDU, CONVENT ROAD, PEYAD, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 7899 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the first accused in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 308 r/w. 149 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations is that a group of 15 persons had all on a sudden trespassed into the shop room of the defacto complainant and indulged in wanton acts of violence with dangerous weapons, which they had concealed on their person. Three persons had suffered injuries. One of them suffered grievous injuries also. In the F.I.R. the miscreants are not named. The victim did not obviously know the miscreants earlier. Even in the F.I.R. it is very specifically stated that there was an incident between the defacto complainant's brother's son and the first accused a week prior to the occurrence and this attack could be a retaliation against that incident, which took place a week earlier. Investigation was conducted. In the F.I. statement no accused was named. In the B.A.No. 7899 of 2007 2 course of investigation some of the persons, who participated in the crime, were arrested. They were questioned and the police has come to know that the miscreants were hirelings of the petitioner, who had engaged them to retaliate against the defacto complainant and others. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner has not been arrested so far. He apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. In these circumstances anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner. Even admittedly the petitioner was not present among the miscreants, who allegedly indulged in the culpable overt acts, submits the counsel. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that all the available indications reveal that the miscreants were hire lings of the petitioner who had wanted to settle scores with the defacto complainant. The petitioner has to be interrogated. Investigation is now taken over by the CBCID. A proper and efficient investigation shall be conducted. The petitioner may not be permitted to arm himself with an order of anticipatory bail, submits the learned Prosecutor. B.A.No. 7899 of 2007 3 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs and the rival submissions. In view of the contention that there is no reference to the petitioner at all in the F.I. statement, the case diary was perused. The F.I. statement very clearly shows that the defacto complainant had alleged that the previous incident with the petitioner must have been responsible for the strangers attacking him. This statement is given by him at the earliest opportunity in the F.I. statement itself. 5. 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 B.A.No. 7899 of 2007 4 law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm