IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2008 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1533 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.79/2008 OF NENMARA POLICE STATION : APPLICANTS/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- 1. SHAJI MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, AGED 38 YEARS, VALALLIPILLI, ARIMBOORAPOTHI, POTHUNDI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. NARAYANAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 35 YEARS, PONAMPARAMBIL, ARIMBOORAPOTHI, POTHUNDI, PALAKKAD. 3. RAVI ARUMUGHAN, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.ARUMUGHAN, MEERANKATHI, ARIMBOORAPOTHI, POTHUNDI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTING PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY S.I. OF NENMARA POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- B.A.No.1533 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of March 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused 1 to 3. Altogether there are three accused persons. All the three are named in the F.I.R. The alleged incident took place on 5/2/2008. F.I.R is seen registered only on 15/2/2008. The injured was taken to the doctor on the date of the occurrence itself, that is 5/2/2008. To the doctor it is very specifically alleged that the injuries were suffered by him when three named persons attacked him with iron rods. Names of all the three persons are shown as the assailants in the wound certificate. The victim had suffered broken teeth as well as fracture of the mandible. He was shifted from hospital to hospital for expert medical treatment. It is, in these circumstances, that he ultimately lodged the F.I.S on 15/2/2008. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent. It is prayed that directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioners to save them from the trauma of arrest and detention. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that there B.A.No.1533/08 2 are no circumstances justifying or warranting the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The learned Public Prosecutor further points out that the delay is of no consequence whatsoever. The same has been explained satisfactorily. The court get assurance for the version of the de facto complainant from the prompt detailed statement made to the doctor who examined the injured shortly after the occurrence. 4. I am satisfied that this is a fit case where the petitioners must appear before the investigating officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the normal and ordinary course. 5. 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.1533/08 3 B.A.No.1533/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007