IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2008 / 29TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3921 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.692/2006 OF KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- 1. DILEEPKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, VELIPARAMBIL HOUSE, COCHIN.33. 2. PYARILAL, AGED 34 YEARS,S/O.VIJAYAN PANICKER,MANATHUPADAM, COCHIN-33. 3. SANU, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.KARUNAKARAN, MANATHUPADAM, COCHIN-33. BY ADV. SRI.C.AJITH KUMAR (KALLESSERIL) SRI.C.ANILKUMAR (KALLESSERIL) RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZER THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3921 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of October 2008 O R D E R Petitioners face indictment as accused 1 to 3 in a prosecution for offences punishable inter alia under Section 3(i) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. All other offences are compoundable; but the offence under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is not compoundable. The petitioner submits that the de facto complainant has already compounded the offence alleged against him. Investigation is not complete. Final report has not been filed. 2. In the wake of Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act., the petitioners are disabled and cannot seek anticipatory bail. They are willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate. But they apprehend that their application for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate. 3. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George vs.Deputy Superintendent of Police Crl.M.C.No.3921/08 2 [2003(1)KLT 339]. 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. I have no reason to assume that the same shall not be done. If the directions are not complied with the avenues of challenge/complaint are available for the petitioner. 4. The apprehension that the bail application may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on the ground that the offence is triable exclusively by a court of Sessions is also found to be without any basis. This court has time and again repeated that the mere fact that the offence is triable exclusively by a court of Sessions is no reason for the learned Magistrate to abdicate his jurisdiction under Section 437 Cr.P.C. The position has been made crystal clear in the decisions in Ali v. State of Kerala [2000(2) KLT 280, Shanu v. State of Kerala [2000(3) KLT 452, Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala [20005(1) KLD(Cri.)42] and P.P.Kader v. State of Kerala [2005(1) KLD(Cri.)250]. 5. This Crl.M.C is in these circumstances dismissed but with the specific observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail, after giving Crl.M.C.No.3921/08 3 sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself in the light of the precedents referred above. 6. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3921/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.3921/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008