IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 3907 of 2007()
1. LALSON, AGED 69, S/O. UNNI,
... Petitioner
2. PRASAD, S/O. LALSON,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.RAMACHANDRAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :03/07/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
B.A.NO. 3907 OF 2007
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2007
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners – father
and son, face allegations, inter alia, under Sec.326 of the IPC.
The crux of the allegations is that on 7/6/07 the petitioners
allegedly attacked the brother of the 1st accused with wooden
sticks and caused injuries including fracture of the fibula.
Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend
imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the victim and the petitioners are close relatives. There were
certain disputes between the parties consequent to the
commission of suicide by the son-in-law of the 1st accused. He
had left a suicide note in which allegations were raised against
the de facto complainant as well as his son-in-law. At the time
B.A.NO. 3907 OF 2007 -: 2 :-
of cremation, there were certain quarrels and exchange of
words. Only to wreak vengeance against the petitioners, a false
complaint has been filed by the de facto complainant.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.
The allegations are serious. Investigation is not complete.
There are no circumstances justifying the invocation of the
discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C., submits the learned
Public Prosecutor.
4. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public
Prosecutor. This, I am satisfied, is a fit case where the
petitioners must resort to the ordinary and normal procedure of
appearing before the Investigating Officer or the learned
Magistrate having jurisdiction. They must then seek regular
bail in the ordinary course. I have no reason to assume that if
the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer or
the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and seek bail in the
ordinary course, the learned Magistrate would not consider the
application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law
and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to be
necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general
directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision
reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police
B.A.NO. 3907 OF 2007 -: 3 :-
(2003 (1) KLT 339).
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
about the same incident another crime has been registered. The
learned Public Prosecutor accepts the said submission and
submits that in the counter case only the offence under Sec.324
of the IPC is established.
6. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the
observation that if the petitioners surrender before the
Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seek 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 and expeditiously – on the date of
surrender itself.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge