IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4180 of 2008() ------------------------- CP.30/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MALAPPURAM CRIME NO.121/08 OF THE KONDOTTY POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUNAS, S/O. ALAVI, ALUNGATHODI, CHIRAYIL CHUNGAM P.O., NEDIYIRIPPU, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP MOHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERAL, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICE, KONDOTTY POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY P.P. SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 4180 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of November, 2008 ORDER The petitioner, who faces indictment as accused No.3 in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (all other offences being bailable); who has not been arrested at the crime stage or thereafter so far; who has not appeared before the learned Magistrate though committal proceedings has already been registered before the learned Magistrate; to procure whose presence, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate and who apprehends imminent arrest, has now come to this Court with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer that direction may be issued to ensure that the dictum in Alice Crl.M.C. No. 4180 of 2008 -: 2 :- George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339) is complied with and that the petitioner's application for regular bail is considered on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. 2. I am not persuaded to agree that any special or specific direction deserves to be issued. Sufficient general directions have already been issued by this Court in the decision in Alice George (supra). I am not satisfied that any special or separate direction deserves to be issued in each case to the learned Magistrate to comply with the directions in Alice George (supra). I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate shall not follow the decision in Alice George (supra). If there be non-compliance, the avenues of challenge/complaint are available to the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner expresses an apprehension that the offence being exclusively triable by a Court of Session, the learned Magistrate may not consider the application for bail on merits – I have taken note of this apprehension also. 4. This Court has time and again reiterated the mere fact Crl.M.C. No. 4180 of 2008 -: 3 :- that the offence under Sec.3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is triable exclusively by a Court of Session is no reason for the Magistrates to abdicate their jurisdiction under Sec.437 Cr.P.C. This position is made crystal clear in the decisions in Ali v. State of Kerala (2000 (2) K.L.T. 280); Shanu v. State of Kerala (2000 (3) K.L.T. 452); Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala (2005 (1) K.L.D. (Cri) 42 and P.P. Kader v. State of Kerala (2005 (1) K.L.D. (Cri) 250). 5. In the result, this application is dismissed, but with the above specific observations. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge