IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2008 / 15TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3746 of 2008() ----------------------------------- CP. NO.57/2008 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KUNNAMKULAM. CRIME NO.89/2005 OF VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION. ... PETITIONER: 7TH ACCUSED ----------------- SATHEESHAN, S/O. BHASKARAN, MARATHU VEEDU, KATTAKAMPAL VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY THALUK, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENT: STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SALIM P.A. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3746 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of October 2008 O R D E R The petitioner, who faces indictment in a prosecution inter alia under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act; against whom a summons was issued under Section 204 Cr.P.C by the learned Magistrate after taking cognizance; who is willing to appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail and who apprehends the benefit of the decision in Sreekumar v. State of Kerala [2008(3) KLT 748] may be denied to him has come to this court with a request that it may be clarified that the decision in Sreekumar (Supra) would be applicable to accused persons who face indictment under the Kerala Abkari Act also notwithstanding the provisions of Section 41A of the Kerala Abkari Act. 2. To apply the dictum in Sreekumar (Supra), the question is not as to what is the offence alleged against the indictee; but only the fact that the discretion under Section 204 Cr.P.C has already been exercised in favour of the indictee. That being so, certainly the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the dictum in Sreekumar (Supra). Crl.M.C.No.3746/08 2 3. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not follow the dictum in Sreekumar (Supra) and Alice George vs.Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003 (1)KLT 339]. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George (Supra). It is not necessary for this court in every subsequent case to issue directions to the Magistracy to follow the dictum in Alice George (Supra). Every court is bound to do the same. If the directions are not complied with the avenues of challenge/complaint are available for the petitioner. 3. In the result, this petition is dismissed subject to the above specific observations. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner for production before the learned Magistrate. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3746/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.3746/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008