IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 30TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 968 of 2008() ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN BA.3503/2006 Dated 25/06/2006 CRIME NO.645/06 OF THE KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED --------------------------------------- DANIEL THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS, PANAYIL VEEDU, POYAPPALLY, POOYAPPALLY VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI.S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 968 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the 3rd accused in a crime registered alleging commission of the offence punishable under Sec.420 of the IPC. The petitioner, along with the co-accused, had come to this Court and by order dated 26/6/06 in B.A.No.3503/06 the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions. The petitioner did not admittedly comply with the conditions imposed. The petitioner has now come to this Court with a renewed prayer for issue of directions under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner, in whose favour the extraordinary equitable discretion was once invoked, and who did not co-operate with B.A. No. 968 OF 2008 -: 2 :- the Investigator, is not entitled to fresh invocation of such extraordinary equitable discretion. 3. I find merit in the objection of the learned Public Prosecutor. The excuse offered by the petitioner that he was not aware of the order passed in B.A.No.3503/06 cannot be swallowed by a prudent mind easily. I am satisfied that it is for the petitioner now to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. All submissions which the petitioner wants to make in favour of grant of regular bail shall be considered by the learned Magistrate. The fact that this application for anticipatory bail is dismissed will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioner to seek and claim regular bail before the learned Magistrate in accordance with law. 4. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seeks bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of B.A. No. 968 OF 2008 -: 3 :- 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