Application for anticipatory bail was disposed of. The court recorded the respondent's submission that no crime was registered against the petitioners and closed the application with liberty to approach the court again.
Bail application closed; liberty to approach the Court again as and when occasion arises.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
FRIDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2010 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1931
Bail Appl..No. 549 of 2010
APPLICANTS
POTHENCODE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.SREEKANTH S.NAIR
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY S.H.O, POTHENCODE POLICE STATION,POTHENCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
B.A. NO. 549 OF 2010
Dated this the 5th day of March, 2010
O R D E R
This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by Mohammed Basheer and Arifa Beevi under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, apprehending arrest by Pothencode Police on an accusation of the petitioners having committed non-bailable offence. The crime number is not mentioned in the Bail Application. The petitioners apprehend arrest on the basis of a petition filed by Sherifa Beevi or her children. Pendency of civil suits is also mentioned in the Bail Application.
The submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor is recorded and the Bail Application is closed with liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court again as and when occasion arises.
(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge
ahz/
Mohammed Basheer and Arifa Beevi
State of Kerala
K.T. Sankaran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
