IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 2297 of 2008()
1. MANU XAVIER, AGED 25 YEARS, KOTTAPPURAM
... Petitioner
2. SHALIN JAIN, AGED 27 YEARS, KOTTAPPURAM,
3. SAJU YESUDASAN, AGED 21 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY S.I.OF
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI. K.SIJU
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :10/04/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
B.A.No.2297 of 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of April, 2008
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused 1 to
3. They face allegations in a crime registered alleging offences
punishable, inter alia, under Sections 452 and 326 I.P.C. Accused
No.1 is named in the F.I.R. He along with 2 others had committed
the offences is the specific allegation in the F.I.R. The alleged
incident took place on 09.03.08. The victim was taken to the
hospital on the same day and the allegation in a nut shell is
mentioned to the doctor also though the details of accused 2 and
3 or the weapons used are not seen mentioned specifically. There
is a fracture of the fourth metacarpal bone suffered by the victim.
Personal animosity is the alleged motive. Investigation is in
progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are absolutely innocent. F.I statement was lodged
only on 11.03.08. Even in such F.I statement accused 2 and 3 are
not named. In any view of the matter, the petitioners do not
deserve to endure the trauma of arrest and detention in the facts
and circumstances of the case. The petitioners may be granted
anticipatory bail, it is prayed.
B.A.No.2297 of 2008 2
3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.
The learned Public Prosecutor submits that there are no features
in this case which can justify or warrant the invocation of the
extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The
victim had been taken to the hospital on the same day and the
nature of assault though all the details have not been narrated
are available in the wound certificate itself. The victim was
hospitalised and the delay in the police reaching the injured to
record the statement cannot justifiably evoke any suspicion or
distrust in the mind of the court. At any rate, the petitioners do
not deserve to be granted anticipatory bail, submits the learned
Public Prosecutor.
4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am
persuaded to agree that there is merit in the opposition by the
learned Public Prosecutor. This, I agree with the learned Public
Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioners must appear before
the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having
jurisdiction and then seek regular bail.
5. This application is, in these circumstances, dismissed,
but I may hasten to observe that if the petitioners surrender
before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and
B.A.No.2297 of 2008 3
apply for 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.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-