IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 29TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1210 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 63/08 OF KATTAKADA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS : ACCUSED ------------------------ 1. SAJI @ YESUDAS, THATTARAKATHU VEETTIL VIRANIKKAVU VILLAGE, ANAKKODE, KALLAMAM PARKKOTTU KUZHI, KATTAKKADA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. NESON, VADAKKEKKARA VEETTIL KALLAMAM, VIRANIKAVU VILLAGE ANAKKODE MURI, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 1210 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 1 and 2. Altogether there are two accused persons. They face allegations in a crime registered under Section 326 I.P.C. The defacto complainant's new shirt was spoiled/damaged by the first accused. The defacto complainant kept on demanding replacement of the shirt. Infuriated by this, the accused persons, in pursuance of their common objected, allegedly attacked the defacto complainant. The first accused caught hold of him and the second accused beat him with a wooden stick. Compound fracture has been suffered by the victim. The incident took place on 7.2.2008. F.I.R. has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent. They have no criminal antecedents. In B.A.No. 1210 of 2008 2 these circumstances the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the petitioners do not deserve to be granted anticipatory bail. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I agree with the learned Prosecutor that there are no features in this case justifying or warranting the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioners. This, I agree with the learned Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioners must be directed to appear before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 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 the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must B.A.No. 1210 of 2008 3 proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm