IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 21ST MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 532 of 2009() ---------------------------- (CRIME NO.164/2008 OF CHITTARIKKAL POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD) PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- JAMES MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, AGED 36 YEARS RESIDING AT PANTHANMAKKAL HOUSE, KANNIVAYAL, PALAVAYAL VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. KAMMAPPU. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl. No. 532 of 2009 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of February, 2009. ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 and 307 read with section 149 of IPC. According to prosecution, on 12.8.2008, petitioner (A6) along with other accused assaulted de facto complainant and another after forming into unlawful assembly and attempted to commit murder etc. Rs.10,000/- was also taken away from the possession of the injured. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is a member of the Grama Panchayat and warrant was issued against him by the committal court and he apprehends arrest. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this bail application and submitted that petitioner was absconding and he had not co-operated with the investigation. Charge was laid and petitioner was shown as absconding accused, but warrant having been issued from the committal court, it may not be proper for this court to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. [B.A.No.532/09] 2 5. On hearing both sides, considering the serious nature of allegations, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. If the petitioner was not actually absconding, he is at liberty to satisfy the same before the committal court when he surrenders and applies for bail under Section 437 Cr.P.C. Consideration for granting anticipatory bail and bail are different and refusal of anticipatory bail by itself may not be a ground to reject bail under Section 437 Cr.P.C. In the above circumstances, the following order is passed: Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and in case an application is filed under Section 437 Cr.P.C. it shall be disposed on merit untramelled by any of the observations made in this order. Petition is disposed of accordingly. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.