SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application filed under Section 438 of the Cr. P. C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants, who apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No. 389/2005 registered at Police Station, kawardha, District Kabirdham (C. G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 294, 323, 506 of the I. P. C. and Section 3 (i) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short Special Act ).

( 2 ) AT the very outset, learned counsel for the State, referring to the memo dated 06. 12. 2005, written by superintendent of Police, District-Kabirdham to the Deputy Superintendent of police A. J. K. Kawardha, submitted that on the direction of the Superintendent of police, which was made on the basis of an application given by the father of the complainant, the offence under the Special Act has been withdrawn by the prosecution and now, the case is registered only under the aforementioned Sections of the IPC and there is no case under the Special Act.

( 3 ) THE case of the prosecution is that the complainant namely, Devesh devdas, a young boy aged about 15 years is a student of Class X. He had some quarrel with the son of applicant No. 1 prior to 24. 10. 2005. The allegations are that on account of this, the applicants entered into the house of the complainant at about 20. 30 hours on 24. 10,2005 and thereafter, assaulted him.

( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the applicants submits that in fact, the applicants had gone to make enquiry as to why the complainant has assaulted the son of applicant no. 1. The allegations levelled against them are false and baseless. He further submits that these applicants have not committed any such act as has been alleged against them. He also submits that the action taken by the father of the complainant would show that nothing like the; earlier report was done by the applicants and for this reason only; the offence under the Special Act has been withdrawn against them, Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicants on anticipatory bail.

( 5 ) ON the other hand, learned state counsel opposes the bail application

( 6 ) I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.

( 7 ) NO doubt, it is the dominion of the State to register an offence under a particular Section applying all its wisdom, but the fact remains that when the matter is placed before the Court of law for ascertaining about the prima facie case for the purpose of bail, the Court is always well within the jurisdiction to look into the material placed before it and to assess as to whether any particular offence is made out or not. Even if, the prosecution has not registered a case under a particular Section and the material placed before the Court goes to show that a particular Section other than the Sections already mentioned by the prosecution is made out, the Court is to act on the substance of the material placed before it with a view to find out a prima facie case on the basis of such materials and not on the basis of the Sections levelled by the prosecution. It is more so required when the legislature mandates a command about the jurisdiction of a court of law and prohibits the entertainment of certain cases by the Court of law under the overriding provisions made in the Act, like Section 18 in the present act.

( 8 ) THE law in relation to entertaining the application under Section 438 cr. P. C. in such offences is well settled. the point raised is no longer res integra. It has been held that if the contents of the F. I. R. or the complaint disclose the commission of offence under the special act, the Courts would not be justified in entering into a further enquiry by summoning the case diary or any other material as to whether the allegations are true or false or whether there is preponderance of probability for commission of such an offence. At this stage, the Court cannot examine and scrutinise the record of the case in order to ascertain the veracity