High Court Kerala High Court

Bani Koshy vs The Dy. S.P. Of Police on 8 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
Bani Koshy vs The Dy. S.P. Of Police on 8 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 8126 of 2007()


1. BANI KOSHY, AGED 29 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. PILSOR KOSHY, AGED 26 YEARS,
3. GEORGE KOSHY, AGED 60 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. THE DY. S.P. OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.SETHUNATH

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :08/01/2008

 O R D E R
                            R.BASANT, J.
                         ----------------------
                         B.A.No.8126 of 2007
                     ----------------------------------------
           Dated this the 8th day of January 2008

                                O R D E R

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are

accused 1 to 3. They face allegations in a crime registered for

offences punishable inter alia under Sections 3(i)(x) and 3(i)(xi)

of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act. All the other offences are bailable. In the wake

of Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, a criminal court is not

jurisdictionally competent to grant anticipatory bail under

Section 438 Cr.P.C. Of course the allegations raised do not

constitute an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and such Section is

erroneously included in the F.I.R, such inclusion may not oust

the jurisdiction of this court under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor contends that the

allegation, if accepted, do constitute an offence punishable under

Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act and I find merit in the opposition

raised by the learned Public Prosecutor. A more detailed

discussion appears to be not necessary in the facts and

circumstances of this case.

B.A.No.8126/07 2

3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned

Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the

ordinary course. This court has time and again reiterated 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] that the mere fact that the offence under Section 3 of

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act is triable exclusively by a court of Session will not

oust the jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate under Section 437

Cr.P.C. The petitioner must hence surrender before the learned

Magistrate and seek regular bail.

4. If the petitioners surrender before the learned

Magistrate and apply or bail after giving sufficient prior notice to

the prosecutor in charge of the case, needless to say, the learned

Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits in

accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender

itself.

5. This petition is accordingly dismissed with the above

observations.




                                             (R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr   // True Copy//       PA to Judge

B.A.No.8126/07    3

B.A.No.8126/07    4

       R.BASANT, J.




         CRL.M.CNo.




            ORDER




21ST DAY OF MAY2007