IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2009 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6267 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.564/09 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION PETITIONER:ACCUSED ------------------------------- K.VASUDEVAN, S/O.KRISHNAN EZHUTHASSAN AGED 45 YEARS, KOLLAYIL HOUSE, CHEMBRA, WORKING AS HEAD MASTER KARUMBATHURA A.U.P.SCHOOL, PATTAMBI. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE PATTAMBI POLICE STATION, PATTAMBI. 3. THE DY.SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SHORNUR, PALAKKAD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6267 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.564 of 2009 of Pattambi Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is that the petitioner abused the de facto complainant and called him by his caste name. It is submitted that the petitioner is the headmaster of a school. According to the petitioner, the de facto complainant had borrowed money from him and the complaint was filed when the petitioner demanded the money back from the de facto complainant. 4. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 12.11.2009, the following order was passed: “After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, BA No.6267/2009 2 I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 21.11.2009 and 22.11.2009. Post on 26.11.2009. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the order before the investigating officer. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.564 of 2009 of Pattambi Police Station.” 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has complied with the direction contained in the order dated 12.11.2009. 6. Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act provides that an application under Section 438 of Crl.P.C. is not maintainable in a case where the offence under the Act is alleged. 6. In Shanu v. State of Kerala (2000 (3) KLT 452), it was held that the Magistrate has power to grant bail to the accused in a case under clauses (i) to (xv) of Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of BA No.6267/2009 3 Atrocities) Act. In that case, the High Court directed the Magistrate to grant bail to the accused. The decision in Shanu's case was followed in B.A.No.789 of 2005 and in Crl.M.C.No.3036 of 2004. In Ali v. State of Kerala (2000 (2) KLT 280), this Court took the view that in cases of similar nature, there is no bar to the Magistrate to exercise the power under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and grant bail. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Bail Application is disposed of as follows: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Pattambi, and apply for regular bail within a period of ten days from today. (ii) If the petitioner complies with the aforesaid direction, the learned Magistrate shall release him on bail on such conditions as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl BA No.6267/2009 4 K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6267 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of November, 2009 ORDER After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 21.11.2009 and 22.11.2009. Post on 26.11.2009. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the order before the investigating officer. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.564 of 2009 of Pattambi Police Station. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl BA No.6267/2009 5 Hand over copy to both sides.