IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 6331 of 2007()
1. MANUGOPALAN, AGED 36 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.DILEEP P.PILLAI
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :17/10/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
B.A.No.6331 of 2007
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of October, 2007
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations
of offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 3 of the P.D.P.P Act.
The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that he, along with
co-accused on account of prior animosity, allegedly destroyed the
electric light of the K.S.E.B in front of the house of the defacto
complainant and unleashed an attack on the defacto complainant. No
serious injuries have resulted. All other offences alleged are bailable
offences except the one under Section 3(2) of the P.D.P.P Act.
Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent
arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent. His name has not been specifically mentioned
in the F.I statement as one of those who had indulged in the specific
culpable overt acts. Directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C may be
issued in favour of the petitioner to save him from the undeserved
trauma of arrest and detention.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.
The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the F.I statement clearly
B.A.No.6331 of 2007 2
shows that the incident took place as a retaliation by the petitioner
and that the other accused are his friends. Investigation is not
complete. All the other accused had surrendered before the learned
Magistrate and have been enlarged on bail. There is absolutely no
justification in the petitioner seeking anticipatory bail, submits the
learned Public Prosecutor. This application for anticipatory bail may
be dismissed, submits the learned Public Prosecutor .
4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in
the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I take note of the
submission of the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is
involved in several other crimes also. It is for the petitioner to appear
before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail in the ordinary
course.
5. This application is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but I
may hasten to observe that if the petitioner surrenders before the 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 and expeditiously.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-
B.A.No.6331 of 2007 3