IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2008 / 19TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2601 of 2008() ------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN BA.3748/2008 Dated 20/06/2008 CRIME NO.135/08 OF KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SAKKERR, S/O. SALIM, AGED 22 YEARS, OEP BUILDINGS PERINKULAM, KOOZHATTINGAL VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2601 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioner is the 1st accused in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Secs.324 and 308 of the IPC. He is named in the F.I.R. In the course of investigation, other persons have also been brought on the array of accused. The Section of offence has been altered to include the allegation under Sec.307 IPC. The petitioner has not been arrested yet. Some of the co-accused had approached this Court for anticipatory bail and they were granted anticipatory bail also. The petitioner has not approached any court for grant of anticipatory bail. The petitioner has now come to this Court with a prayer that the F.I.R. registered against him may be quashed. 2. What is the grievance? According to the petitioner, Crl.M.C. No. 2601 of 2008 -: 2 :- the present allegations are only the counter blast against the allegations raised by him against the de facto complainant in relation to an incident which had taken place on the previous day. The father and mother of the de facto complainant are politically highly influential. They have prevailed upon the police to register such a false case with the transparent intention of vexing and harassing the petitioner. The de facto complainant had gone to the hospital; but within two hours he was discharged from the hospital. Exaggerated allegation of offences under Secs.308 and 307 IPC are being unnecessarily raised with the sole intention of vexing and harassing the petitioner. In these circumstances, the F.I.R. may be quashed, it is prayed. 3. I have considered all the relevant circumstances. I shall not embark on any detailed discussions about the acceptability of the allegations or the credibility of the data collected. Suffice it to say that the petitioner, who has not chosen to seek anticipatory bail, does not appear to have any sufficient grounds to justify the invocation of the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. The petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail, if he is advised not to approach the superior courts for anticipatory bail. Such Crl.M.C. No. 2601 of 2008 -: 3 :- application for regular bail, if filed, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, must, needless to say, be disposed of by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate will not do the same. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). No special or specific directions need be issued. 4. This Crl.M.C. is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge