IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 7776 of 2007()
1. SANJU BUKHARI & OTHERS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.M.AMEER ALI
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :17/12/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
B.A.No.7776 of 2007
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of December 2007
O R D E R
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are
accused 1 to 7. They face allegations for offences punishable
inter alia under Section 353 I.P.C and Section 3(2) of the P.D.P.P
Act. They were allegedly members of an unlawful assembly of
persons who went to the office of the KSEB and had indulged in
wanton acts of mischief and violence. Damage was caused in the
building and officials were deterred in the performance of their
official duty. The alleged incident took place on 01/12/2007.
The petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. In the course of
investigation, their complicity has been ascertained. The
petitioners apprehend imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are absolutely innocent. They are Youth
Congress workers. On account of political animosity, the
petitioners have been arrayed as accused. They may be granted
anticipatory bail.
3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor.
The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the scene mahazer
bears eloquent testimony to the acts of damage and violence
B.A.No.7776/07 2
which is caused. It is true that in the course of investigation, the
complicity of the petitioners has been ascertained and they have
been arrayed as accused. In any view of the matter, there is
absolutely no merit in the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail,
submits the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit
in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am satisfied
that there are no features in this case which would justify
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 petitioner must appear 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 petition is dismissed. Needless to
say, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer
or the learned Magistrate and applies 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)
jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge
B.A.No.7776/07 3
B.A.No.7776/07 4
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF MAY2007