High CourtsSingle Bench

Chandran vs State of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 13 October 2006 · Citation: (2006) 4 KLT 550

HON’BLE JUDGES
J.M. James, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2005 — Section 16, 25, 28, 38, 42 · Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 323, 324, 34, 341, 42
CASE NUMBER
B.A. No. 6129 of 2006
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 343 words

J.M. James, J.—The petitioners are accused 1 to 3, in crime No.74/2006 of Kolavalloor Police Station, for the offence punishable under Ss.341, 323 and 324 IPC read with Section 34 IPC.

2.

The learned Counsel submits that the Sessions Court, Thalassery, had dismissed the prayer for an order, u/s 438 Cr.P.C. on the ground that the investigation is not over. The offence under Sections 341, 323 and 324 IPC are bailable. Though the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act 2005, Act 25 of 2005, had been implemented from the appointed date, 23.6.2006, all the provisions contained thereunder, had not been brought into force. The Gazette of India Extraordinary dated 21.6.2006 contains S.O.No. 923(E), notifying that though 23.6.2006 is appointed as the date on which the provisions of Act 25 of 2005 would come into effect the provisions of Sections 16, 25, 28(a), 28(b), 38, 42(a), 42(b), 42(f)(iii) and (iv) and 44(a) have been excluded.

3.

u/s 42(f)(iii) against Section 324 IPC, in fifth column of First Schedule of Cr.P.C. the word ''bailable'' is deleted and ''non bailable'' is included However, because of the non implementation of Section 42(f)(iii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2005, the offence u/s 324 IPC still continues to remain as bailable.

4.

The learned Counsel Mr. K.S. Madhusoodanan submits that there is a doubt in this regard at least in some Courts. Therefore, Section 324 is considered as non bailable and bail is being refused. The counsel cites the dismissal of the application, u/s 438 Cr.P.C. Crl.M.C.No. 1425/2006 dated 27.9.2006, by the Sessions Court. Thalassery, as an example.

5.

In the above facts situation, I direct the petitioners to appear before the Lower Court and the learned Magistrate shall allow them to be on bail, on the application(s) that may be filed by them.

6.

In order to avoid further difficulties that may arise in the dispensation of justice, in similar matters, communicate this order to all the Magistrate Courts, so that the doubts, if any, could be cleared.

The application is disposed of as above.