IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 1010 of 2008()
1. KABEER, S/O. ABOOBACKER
... Petitioner
2. YOUNIS,S/O,. FASAL,
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 :25/02/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
B.A. No.1010 of 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of February, 2008
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are
accused 2 and 3. Altogether, there are 10 accused persons.
The petitioners, along with the co-accused, were found under
suspicious circumstances on 19/1/08. Their presence under
suspicious circumstances aroused doubts in the mind of the
detecting officer that the offence under Sec.399 of the IPC is
committed by them. He could apprehend only one of the
accused persons. He was already arrested and has been
enlarged on regular bail as per the order dated 11/2/08 in B.A.
No.801/08. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners have
not been arrested so far. The petitioners apprehend imminent
arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
B.A. No.1010 of 2008 -: 2 :-
the petitioners are absolutely innocent. In any view of the
matter, it may not be held that the petitioners are guilty of any
offence under Sec.399 of the IPC. No specific allegations of
criminal antecedents are raised against the petitioners, it is
submitted. In any view of the matter, the petitioners may now
be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.
Custodial interrogation of the petitioners is absolutely essential
for a proper investigation of the case. The petitioners do not
deserve the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion
under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. in their favour, 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 unable to
perceive any features in this case that can justify or warrant the
invocation of the jurisdiction under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. This,
I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor, is an eminently fit
case where the petitioners must surrender before the
Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having
jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the usual and normal
course.
5. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with
B.A. No.1010 of 2008 -: 3 :-
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.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge