IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 731 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRMP.273/2008 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM CRIME NO.24/2008 OF EZHUKONE POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER : ACCUSED ------------------------ RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI,S/O.CHELLAPPAN PILLA VRINDAVANAM, IRUMPANANGADU MURI EZHUKONE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.731 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered for the offences punishable under Section 326 I.P.C. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had beaten the defacto complainant with a dangerous weapon, a bamboo stick, and caused injuries including a fracture of the patella of the left knee. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. Petitioner, the sole accused, apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. False and vexatious allegations are being raised against the petitioner by the defacto complainant who has ill will and animosity against the petitioner. No incident as alleged had at all taken place. The defacto complainant is in the habit of consuming alcohol. He must have fallen and suffered the injury. He has raised the present allegations with the transparent intention of vexing and harassing the petitioner. The petitioner may, in these circumstances, be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. B.A.No.731 of 2008 2 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor has placed the case diary before me. The alleged incident took place at about 7.10 a.m. By 9.30 a.m, the victim is before the doctor and to the doctor he has made a clean narration of the manner in which the injury has been suffered. X-ray confirms the fracture. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am unable to find any features in this case which can justify the 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. 5. This application is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but I may hasten to observe that if the petitioner surrenders before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and applies 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 and expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- B.A.No.731 of 2008 3