IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 15TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 551 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 467/07 OF ERATTUPETTA POLICE STATION CRLMP.12/2008 of DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER : ACCUSED ------------------------ PEETHAMBARAN,S/O.C.K.KUTTAPPAN CHOKKATTU HOUSE, VELATHUSERRY, MAVIDA KARA, TEEKOY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.467 OF 2007 OF ERATTUPETTA POLICE STATION) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 551 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 308 I.P.C. On account of prior animosity, the petitioner is alleged to have inflicted serious injury on the neck of the victim with a blade. The prosecution alleges that with the requisite contumacious intention the petitioner deliberately inflicted a serious injury, though it is not yet alleged that the injury as such is grievous. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. The petitioner was not the aggressor, but he was only the victim of aggression. In any view of the matter, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. B.A.No. 551 of 2008 2 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the nature of the injury and the manner in which the injury has been inflicted must convey to the court that the allegation under Section 308 I.P.C. is perfectly justified. The learned Prosecutor was requested to place the case diary for my perusal. I have perused the same. At this early stage of investigation I shall not embark on any detailed discussion on merit about the acceptability of the allegations raised or the credibility of the data collected. Suffice it to say that the materials collected about the entire sequence of events have been perused by me. The nature of the injury as revealed from the wound certificate as also the statement of the doctor recorded have been read over to me. On an anxious consideration of all other relevant circumstances, I am unable to perceive any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This, I agree with the learned Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioner must be directed to appear before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. B.A.No. 551 of 2008 3 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before 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 orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm