IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 697 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.2202/07 OF THE ALUVA POLICE STATION .................... : PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.7 &8: ---------------------------------------------- 1. HARIS, S/O. MUHAMMED, AGED 35 YEARS, MANNARKUTTIL HOUSE, KADUNGALLOOR VILLAGE,KUNHUNNIKKARA, PARAVUR TALUK. 2. MARANGATTU NAZAR, S/O. KUNHEEN PILLA, AGED 40 YEARS, KADUNGALLOOR VILLAGE,KUNHUNNIKKARA, PARAVUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION. (RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- B.A.No.697 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of February 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 7 and 8. They face allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable inter alia under Sections 307 and 326 read with 149 I.P.C. The alleged incident took place on 27/11/2007. In prosecution of the common object of an unlawful assembly of which the petitioners were members - there are altogether 19 persons - they armed with dangerous weapons like swords, iron rods etc. attacked the de facto complainant and three others. Serious injuries were inflicted on the victims including fractures. Investigation is in progress. Final report has not been filed. Some of the co-accused who had been arrested, had been enlarged on bail as per common order of this court dated 08/01/2008. The petitioners have not been arrested. They apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners prays that the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application and submits that no circumstances exist to justify the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. B.A.No.697/08 2 3. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am satisfied that there are no features in this case which would justify invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. This, I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioner must appear before the investigating officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the normal and ordinary course. The mere fact that some of the co-accused have been granted regular bail is no reason to justify the claim of the petitioners for anticipatory bail. 4. In the result, this petition is dismissed. Needless to say, if the petitioners surrender before the investigating officer or 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 appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge B.A.No.697/08 3 B.A.No.697/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007