1. The petitioner herein has filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Peerumed, alleging various offences against persons named as accused in the complaint. The incidents alleged in the complaint happened during night on 22-10-1986 at Thankamani Village in Idukki District. S.395 of the Indian Penal Code is the most serious among the offences of which the Magistrate took cognizance. Pursuant to the process issued, the respondents herein (who are shown as A2 and A7 respectively in the complaint) appeared before the Magistrate. They were allowed to be released on bail despite opposition from the complainant. Hence the complainant has now filed this petition for cancellation of the bail granted to the respondents.

2. The contentions of the petitioner are mainly two. The first is that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to grant bail in cases involving offences punishable with imprisonment for life. The second contention is that the Magistrate, even if he has jurisdiction, has acted erroneously in exercising his discretion. Counsel made a plea for reconsideration of the ratio in Satyan v. State of Kerala (1981 KLT 606).

3. The offence under S.395 of