IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 2025 of 2008()
1. BINU, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.UTHAMAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :07/04/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
B.A. No. 2025 of 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of April, 2008
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the 1st
accused. Altogether, there are 2 accused persons. The 2nd
accused has already been arrested. Both the accused persons
have been named in the F.I.R. The alleged incident took place
on 21/3/08. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner
is that they allegedly tormented and assaulted the sister of the
de facto complainant who attends a tutorial college. On
receipt of information from the tutorial college, the petitioner
in desperation was proceeding towards the tutorial college at
which time the accused persons came in a vehicle and stopped
near the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant
questioned them as to what they had done to his sister. At this
point of time, the accused persons allegedly attacked the de
B.A. No. 2025 of 2008 -: 2 :-
facto complainant with dangerous weapons. One was carrying a
sword and the other was carrying an iron rod. The de facto
complainant ran for shelter towards his house. The accused
persons are alleged to have followed him. The sword was
thrown at the de facto complainant. He was allegedly attacked
by the miscreants after he entered the house. The miscreants
allegedly followed him into his house. Allegations are raised,
inter alia, under Secs.452 of the IPC and Sec.27 of the Arms Act.
Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends
imminent arrest. No wound certificate is available in the file
though there are indications to show that the victim has suffered
some injuries from the body note which forms part of the First
Information Statement.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is absolutely innocent. The allegations are inherently
improbable. If the de facto complainant had received information
about what transpired at the tutorial college, how is it that he is
able to see the miscreants when he went out of his house
towards the road. Significantly, the Case Diary does not reveal
and the petitioner does not advance a definite version about the
distance between the tutorial college and the house of the de
facto complainant. In these circumstances, that alleged
B.A. No. 2025 of 2008 -: 3 :-
circumstance cannot be reckoned as one indicating such
improbability as to justify the invocation of the extraordinary
equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. This, I agree
with the learned Public Prosecutor, is a fit case where the
petitioner must resort to the ordinary and normal course of
appearing before the Investigating Officer or the learned
Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the
ordinary course.
3. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with
the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the
Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seeks 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.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
