Suresh Babu vs State Of Kerala on 21 January, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 329 of 2008()


1. SURESH BABU, S/O PADMA KOMALAN,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SANAL, S/O VASU,
3. SUNNY, S/O VARGHESE,
4. RAGHAVAN, S/O RAMAN,
5. RAJAPPAN, NAMPULLI PURAYIL,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :21/01/2008

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.


             ````````````````````````````````````````````````````

                      B.A. No. 329 OF 2008 C

             ````````````````````````````````````````````````````

            Dated this the 21st day of January, 2008


                               O R D E R

Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are

accused Nos.1 to 5. Altogether there five accused persons.

All the five had allegedly attempted to transport arrack on

23.12.07 when they were intercepted by the detecting excise

party. Each of them was allegedly carrying a tube which

contained about 20 litres of arrack. They ran away on seeing

the excise party. They could not be apprehended. The

contemporaneous seizure mahazar and the occurrence report

reveal the complicity of the petitioners. Their names are

allegedly ascertained from the local witnesses. Investigation

is in progress. Petitioners apprehend imminent arrest.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

the allegations are totally false and vexatious. The petitioners

may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed.

BA.329/08

: 2 :

3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the

application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the

first accused has criminal antecedents, which point to the

culpability of the petitioners. There are no circumstances

warranting or justifying the invocation of the extraordinary

equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The

petitioners may now be directed to surrender before the

learned Magistrate or the investigating officer and then seek

regular bail in the ordinary course, submits the learned Public

Prosecutor.

4. I find merit in the opposition of the learned Public

Prosecutor. I am satisfied that there are no features in this

case which would justify the invocation of the extraordinary

equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 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 in the normal and ordinary course.

BA.329/08

: 3 :

5. In the result, this petition is dismissed. Needless to

say, if the petitioners surrender before the investigating officer

or the learned Magistrate and 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, in accordance with law and expeditiously.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

aks