Skip to content


A.M. Ali and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and anr. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Subject

Criminal

Court

Kerala High Court

Decided On

Case Number

Cr. M.C. Nos. 1671 and 2035 of 2000

Judge

Reported in

2000CriLJ2721

Acts

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 18; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 437

Appellant

A.M. Ali and ors.

Respondent

State of Kerala and anr.

Appellant Advocate

Babu Joseph Kuruvathazha,; V.A. Hakeem and; Pauly Mathew

Respondent Advocate

P.N. Sukumaran, Public Prosecutor

Excerpt:


- land acquisition act, 1894 [c.a. no. 1/1894 section 54; [v.k. bali, cj, kurian joseph & k. balakrishnan nair, jj] appeal court fee payable held, court fee is liable to be paid on an ad varolem basis on compensation amount claimed in appeal. .....will not be granted bail by the magistrate on their surrendering before the court. an anticipatory bail order is prohibited by the provisions in the section 18 of the act. though the case is triable by sessions court, there is no prohibition in granting regular bail. the supreme court has made it clear that committal proceeding must be followed in cases under the act. section 3 of the act take in a number of offences. some are grave offences. some offences are comparatively not that grave and carry only a lesser punishment. in many cases pre trial detention in judicial custody will not be necessary or even be unjust. there is no bar for the magistrate for granting bail in such cases on the basis of the general principles enunciated in section 437, cr.p.c. if the petitioners surrender before the court or are arrested and produced, the magistrate will consider any bail application on merits.the cri. m.cs. are disposed of with the above directions.

Judgment:


ORDER

K.V. Sankaranarayanan, J.

1. The Sub Inspector of Police, North Parur has registered a case as Crime No. 107/2000 on a complaint from one Appu against the first petitioner and others for offences including one under Section 3(1)(XV) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prayer in these petitions is to quash the complaint. It is contended that the First Information Report does not make out a case under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. From a perusal of the First Information Statement it is not possible to say that such a case is not made out. So there is no scope for quashing the complaint at this stage. It is for the investigating agency to collect evidence and examine whether there is scope for filing a final report under the provisions of the Act also.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that since the case is triable by Sessions Court, the petitioners will not be granted bail by the Magistrate on their surrendering before the Court. An anticipatory bail order is prohibited by the provisions in the Section 18 of the Act. Though the case is triable by Sessions Court, there is no prohibition in granting regular bail. The Supreme Court has made it clear that committal proceeding must be followed in cases under the Act. Section 3 of the Act take in a number of offences. Some are grave offences. Some offences are comparatively not that grave and carry only a lesser punishment. In many cases pre trial detention in judicial custody will not be necessary or even be unjust. There is no bar for the Magistrate for granting bail in such cases on the basis of the general principles enunciated in Section 437, Cr.P.C. If the petitioners surrender before the Court or are arrested and produced, the Magistrate will consider any bail application on merits.

The Cri. M.Cs. are disposed of with the above directions.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //