IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 167 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 338/07 OF CHIRAYINKEEZHU POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ------------------------------------ 1. SOMAN, VALILYAVILA VEEDU, THOTTAVARAM, KOONTHALLOOR, KIZHUVALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. VIJAYAKUMARI, VALIYAVILA VEEDU, THOTTAVARAM, KOONTHALLOOR, KIZHUVALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 167 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners - spouses - face allegations under Section 326 r/w. 34 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations against the petitioners is that they, in furtherance of their common intention, had caused grievous hurt to the victim, a neighbour of theirs, aged about 70 years. There was some civil disputes between the parties. There was an altercation between the second accused/wife and the victim. In the course of that altercation, in furtherance of their common intention, the first accused had allegedly beaten the victim, resulting in a fracture of the radius. She was promptly taken to the doctor. To the doctor allegation has been made that the injury has been caused because of beating with a stick. Investigation is in progress. In the F.I. statement lodged on 28.12.2007 allegations are raised against both the petitioners. They apprehend imminent arrest. B.A.No. 167 of 2008 2 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is absolutely incorrect to say that the victim suffered any injury on account of assault by the petitioners. She must have been fallen in the pit on the side of the pathway and was raising false allegations against them. The second accused is not in any way connected with the crime. She may at any rate be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the allegations must be viewed seriously. A 70 year old woman was assaulted by beating with a stick. At any rate, 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 petitioners. This the learned Prosecutor submits is a fit case where the petitioners 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. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I agree with the learned Prosecutor that this is a fit case where the petitioners must resort to B.A.No. 167 of 2008 3 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 petitioners appear before the learned Magistrate and apply 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