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. 7900 of 2007(J) ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 213/07 OF KANAKAKKUNNU POLICE STATION PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED --------------------------------------- JAYACHANDRAN, AGED 42 YEARS, JAYA BHAVANAM, MUTHUKULAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, REPRESENTING S.H.O, KANAKAKKUNNU POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR 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. 7900 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. He faces allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 308 and 326 I.P.C. Altogether there are three accused persons. The defacto complainant is allegedly a social worker. He had raised complaint against accused 1 and 2 - that they were carrying on illicit sale of liquor etc. Enraged by that conduct of the defacto complainant, the accused persons are alleged to have schemed to attack the defacto complainant. Accused 2 and 3 allegedly attacked the defacto complainant and caused injuries to him, including a fracture. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. He is not aware of any complaint filed by the defacto complainant. He is not aware of the alleged B.A.No. 7900 of 2007 2 attack by accused 2 and 3 against the defacto complainant. He is unnecessarily dragged into the controversy, submits the counsel. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the available indications clearly point to the complicity of accused 2 and 3. The petitioner has to be interrogated. He may not be permitted to arm himself with an order of anticipatory bail at this stage. Grant of anticipatory bail would hamper the smooth course of investigation. The petitioner may be directed to co-operate with the investigators, surrender before the Investigators or the learned Magistrate and then seek regular bail, submits the learned Prosecutor. 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am unable to perceive 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. 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. B.A.No. 7900 of 2007 3 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