IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 24TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 827 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 31/08 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. DILEEP KUMAR D., DILEEP BHAVAN, KALLUKUZHI, CHOZHIYAKKODE P.O., KULATHUPUZHA. 2. RAJEEV D., DILEEP BHAVAN, KALLUKUZHI, CHOZHIYAKKODE P.O., KULATHUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 827 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners face allegations in a crime registered under Section 353 I.P.C. The conductor of a K.S.R.T.C. bus is the victim. It is alleged that the said conductor had behaved improperly to the mother of one of the accused - in having not stopped the vehicle at the bus stop proper. Enraged by this conduct of the defacto complainant the petitioners, the son of the said lady and a friend of his, allegedly entered the bus later on that day and assaulted the defacto complainant/conductor while he was in the course of performance of his duty as such conductor. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. Exaggerated allegations are being raised against the petitioners, it is urged. B.A.No. 827 of 2008 2 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Prosecutor, after perusing the case diary, has drawn my attention to the injury suffered by the victim. He submits that this cannot be reckoned as a conduct in the heat of passion. It must be seen that the petitioners had with prior planning entered the bus. They may not be granted anticipatory bail. There are no circumstances justifying or warranting the invocation of the discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioners, submits the learned Prosecutor. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. It is for the petitioners to resort to the ordinary and normal course of appearing before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. I have not chosen to express any opinion on the rights of the petitioners to claim regular bail. I have only chosen to hold that the petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioners appear before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to B.A.No. 827 of 2008 3 the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm