SATYAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an accused in C. C. No. 112 of 1981 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Adoor, wherein offences under S.324, 326, 379 read with S.34 of the Indian Penal Code are alleged against him and others. When the petitioner moved for bail the Magistrate dismissed the petition. The court proceeded on the footing that since an offence under S.326 of the Indian Penal Code is punishable with imprisonment for life the court has no power to grant bail except in cases where the first proviso to S.437 can be invoked. Aggrieved by the order refusing bail the petitioner has come up before this Court with an application under S.439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He has been granted interim bail till the disposal of this petition.

(2.) Ordinarily a petitioner is expected to move for bail in this court only after approaching the Sessions Judge. But it is noted that the learned Magistrate has given a wrong interpretation to S.437(1). It is reported that in some other similar cases also he has refused bail on the ground that he had no power to grant bail. It is only proper that the matter is set right.

(3.) S.437(1) reads: