IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 3672 of 2007()
1. MOHAMMED ASHRAF K.A.,
... Petitioner
2. HAMZA C.P., AGED 43 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.M.HABEEB
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :19/06/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
B.A.No.3672 of 2007
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of June, 2007
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused 1 and
2. They face allegations, inter alia, under Section 326 read with 149
I.P.C. The crux of the allegations is that the petitioners had
trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and
attempted to construct a road towards the property of the 1st accused.
When the defacto complainant objected, he was allegedly beaten with
an iron rod resulting in fracture of the shoulder bone. The incident
took place on 18.04.2007. F.I.R was registered on the same day.
Names of the accused are shown in the F.I.R, though the Doctor in the
wound certificate does not appear to have recorded the names of the
assailants.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are absolutely innocent. On account of prior animosity,
such false allegations have been raised. Petitioners are willing to co-
operate with the Investigating Officer. Subject to appropriate
conditions, anticipatory bail may be granted, it is prayed.
3. The application is opposed by the learned Public
Prosecutor. The allegations are serious. The injuries suffered include
a fracture. The weapon of offence has been recovered. There are no
B.A.No.3672 of 2007 2
circumstances justifying the invocation of the extraordinary equitable
discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C, submits the learned Public
Prosecutor.
4. I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor. I find merit in
the opposition. I am not persuaded to agree that this is a fit case
where directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C can or ought to be issued.
This, I am satisfied, is a fit case where the petitioners must resort to
the ordinary and regular procedure of appearing before the learned
Magistrate or surrender before the Investigating Officer. They must
then apply for bail in the regular course.
5. This Bail Application is, in these circumstances, dismissed.
Needless to say that the petitioners shall be at liberty to surrender
before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. Their applications
for bail will have to be considered in accordance with law and
expeditiously.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-