IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1187 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.104/08 OF THE KONDOTTY POLICE STATION .............................. PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 5: ------------------------------------------------ 1. MUHAMMED SAKEER, S/O. MOIDEEN, THAZHATHEYIL HOUSE, POTHUVETTIPARA,MALAPPURAM DIST 2. ABDU SAMAD, S/O. SAIDALAVI, ADAMPULAN HUSE, NEDIYIRIPPU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. AHAMMEDKUTTY, S/O. ABOOBACKER, THAVALAPARA HOUSE, POTHUVETTIPARA,MALAPPURAM DIST. 4. KALANGADAN SHYJAL, S/O.MUHAMMED UNNI, KAMMALIYIL HOUSE, POTHUVETTIPARA,MALAPPURAM DIST. 5. MUHAMMED SHAREEF,S/O.HYDROSE KODAKKADAN, THAVALAPARA HOUSE, POTHUVETTIPARA,MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR SRI.K.RAKESH RESPONDENTS: STATE: ------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONDOTTY POLICE STATION - THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. BY P.P. SRI. JAI GEORGE. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 1187 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 1 to 5. The crime was registered alleging commission of the offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.324 read with Sec.149 of the IPC. All the offences alleged in the F.I.R. were bailable, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. In the course of investigation, a report has been filed to incorporate the allegation under Sec.3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short `the Act'). Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. Inclusion of the B.A. No. 1187 OF 2008 -: 2 :- offence under Sec.Sec.3(1)(x) of the Act is without any justification. The petitioners may, in these circumstances, be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 4. In view of the bar under Sec.18 of the Act, the petitioners, who face allegations under the said Act, cannot successfully claim an order under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioners then submits that there may, at least, be a direction for expeditious consideration of the application for regular bail. The learned Magistrate may be directed to dispose of the application for regular bail in accordance with law, on merits and expeditiously. 5. It is by now trite and this Court had repeated the said proposition in the decisions reported 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) that notwithstanding the fact that the offences are triable by a Court of Session, the Magistrate is obliged to consider the application for bail of an accused facing allegations under Sec.3 of the SC/ST (PA) Act on merits. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that the interests of justice will be served eminently by issue of a direction to the B.A. No. 1187 OF 2008 -: 3 :- learned Magistrate to consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioners on their surrender before the learned Magistrate – of course, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor-in- charge expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself and in the light of the decisions referred above. 6. This bail application is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above specific observations. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge