IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7354 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CRIME NO.652/2009 OF RANNI POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. V.K.MOHANAN NAIR,AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR,VAZHAKALAYIL HOUSE,PULLOOPRAM, ANGADI.P.O,RANNI TALUK,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. SADANDAN.P.M @ ANANDAN,AGD 41 YEARS, S/O.MANOHARAN,POLLOLIL VEEDU,ANGADI MURI & VILLAGE RANNI TALUK,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT/STATE: -------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE DY.S.P OF POLICE,THIRUVALLA. 2. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. T. SANKARAN, J. ------------------------- B.A. No. 7354 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioners are the accused persons in Crime No.652/2009 of Ranni Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 25/11/2009, the petitioners abused the de facto complainant calling him by his caste name. According to the de facto complainant, this was done as he was not willing to purchase Indian Made Foreign Liquor from the Beverage Corporation outlet, on the request of the accused. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that all the offences under the Indian Penal Code alleged against the petitioners are bailable. However, the petitioners apprehend that if they are arrested, the learned Magistrate would not grant bail B.A. No. 7354 /2009 2 as the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is a Sessions Offence. 5. In Shanu Vs. State of Kerala [2000(3) K.L.T. 452], it was held that the Magistrate has power to grant bail to an accused in cases coming under Clauses (i) to (xv) of Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. In that case, High Court directed the Magistrate to grant bail to the accused. The decision in Shanu's case was followed in B.A. No. 789/2005 and also in Krishnakumar Vs. State of Kerala (Crl. M.C. No.3036/2004). In Ali Vs. State of Kerala [2000(2) K.L.T.280], it was held that there is no bar for the Magistrate to grant bail in such cases on the basis of the general principles enunciated in Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In Sukumari Vs. State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T.22], it was held that the power under Section 437 can be invoked by the Magistrate even in cases involving a Sessions offence. 6. It is submitted that the petitioners are prepared to B.A. No. 7354 /2009 3 appear before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Ranni and to apply for bail. 7. If the petitioners appear and file an application for bail, the learned Magistrate shall consider the Bail Application on the date on which it is filed and pass appropriate orders. The Bail Application is accordingly disposed of. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE scm B.A. No. 7354 /2009 4