IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2008 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 2020 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.84/08 OF KOLATHUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS : ACCUSED NOS.2 & 4 ---------------------------------- 1. NOUSHAD ALI K.T., S/O.ABBAS KONDATHODY HOUSE, RANDAM MILE CHEMMALASSERY P.O., PULAMANTHOLE VILLAGE PERINTHALMANNA TALUK. 2. SAINULABDIN, S/O.ABDUL KHADER THACHANGADAN HOUSE, RANDAM MILE CHEMMALASSERY P.O., PERINTHALMANNA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.ALAN PAPALI SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESETNED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 2020 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 2 and 4 in a crime registered alleging the offence punishable under Sec.353 read with Sec.149 of the IPC as also under the M.M.D.R. Act. A police party found an autorikshaw loaded with river sand. They intercepted the vehicle, wanted to effect arrest of the miscreants and to seizure the autorikshaw. A group of about 20 persons allegedly deterred the police party from the discharge of their official duty. There are 4 named persons and 16 others as accused in the F.I.R. The petitioners are two of the 4 named accused. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The co-accused (A3) had come to this Court with a prayer for anticipatory bail and this Court by an earlier order B.A. No. 2020 of 2008 -: 2 :- dated 1/4/08 in B.A.No.1963/08 had rejected the said application for anticipatory bail. I have adverted to the facts in detail in the said order. This order must be read in continuation of the said order. I am hence not adverting to the facts in any greater detail in this order. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. No specific overt acts are alleged against any one of the accused. In these circumstances, the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application and for the same reasons which I have adverted to in the order dated 1.4.08 I am persuaded to agree that there are no circumstances justifying or warranting the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners herein must also, like the co-accused referred above, surrender 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 bail application is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seek bail, B.A. No. 2020 of 2008 -: 3 :- 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. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge