IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4984 of 2008 ---------------------------------- ( CRIME NO. 454/2008 OF PAZHAYANGADI POLICE STATION) ............ PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ 1. HAKEEM, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. ABDULLA, `UDINOOR PURAYIL', MADAYI, MATTOOL NORTH, PUTHIYANGADI AMSOM DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. USMAN.B., S/O. ABDULLA.P.C., AGED 26 YEARS, `PAYAN HOUSE', MADAYI, MATTOOL NORTH, PUTHIYANGADI AMSOM DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN. RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, THROUGH PAZHAYANGADI POLICE. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.4984 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008 ORDER The petitioners face allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short 'the Act'). All other offences alleged are bailable offence, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. According to the petitioners, they are absolutely innocent. The petitioners are unable to seek anticipatory bail in the light of the provisions in Sec.18 of the Act. The petitioners are willing to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. But the petitioners apprehend that the offence alleged being one exclusively triable by a Court of Session, the learned Crl.M.C. No.4984 of 2008 -: 2 :- Magistrate may not consider the applications for bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. In these circumstances, it is prayed that appropriate directions may be issued. 3. It is for the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued by this Court in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339) to ensure expeditious disposal of the applications for bail filed by the persons surrendering before the Magistrate. 4. 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) this Court has already reiterated that the mere fact that the offence is triable exclusively by a Court of Session cannot justify the abdication of the jurisdiction by the Magistrate under Sec.437 Cr.P.C. 5. In these circumstances, I do not find any necessity to issue any further, special or specific directions in favour of the petitioner. I have no reason to assume that the learned Crl.M.C. No.4984 of 2008 -: 3 :- Magistrate shall not consider the bail applications in the light of the precedents referred above on merits and expeditiously. 6. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. 7. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Crl.M.C. No.4984 of 2008 -: 4 :-