Disposed

Majeed and Another v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 May 2011Bail Appl./3527/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a pre-arrest bail application under Sections 420 and 406 IPC regarding non-delivery of cows, the High Court directed surrender within 10 days. If arrested, applicants are entitled to bail on Rs. 50,000 bond with specific conditions including appearance before the investigating officer and producing passports.

What did the court decide?

Directions for surrender; conditional pre-arrest bail on Rs. 50,000 bond if arrested.

Majeed and Another Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2011 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3527 of 2011() ---------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.14303/2010 Dated 04/05/2010 CRIME NO.400/2011 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶7

----------------------------

¶8

1. MAJEED, KOYITTIKANDY HOUSE, NEAR BSNL EXCHANGE, KAKKATTIL P.O., VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

2. DANISH MAJEED, S/O. MAJEED, KOYITTIKANDY HOUSE, NEAR BSNL EXCHANGE, KAKKATTIL P.O., VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SMT.C.G.PREETHA

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE

¶12

-----------------------------------------------

¶13

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

¶14

THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA , ERNAKULAM.

¶15

ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED

¶16

2. IBRAHIM M.P., KUTTIKATTIL VEEDU, P.O.PONMERI PARAMBIL, VILLYAPALLI, VADAKARA

¶17

R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 17/05/2011 IN CRL.MA.2844/2011.

¶18

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.K.MEERA R2 BY ADVS.SRI.PULIKOOL ABUBACKER

¶19

SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER SRI.P.S.BINU

¶20

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

svs

¶22

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶23

B.A.No. 3527 OF 2011

¶24

Dated this the 17^th day of May, 2011

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Petitioners are accused in Crime No.400/2011 of

¶27

Vatakara Police Station. It was registered under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C. This application is for pre-arrest bail.

¶28

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶29

petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and also gone through the available records. The learned counsel for the de facto complainant has opposed the bail application stating that the cows as agreed were not delivered by the accused. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute is only of a civil nature and he further submits that the petitioners were ready and willing to supply cows as per the terms of the agreement. Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued.

¶30

The petitioners shall surrender before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction within 10 days from today and will apply for regular bail. The learned Magistrate will dispose

¶31

of the bail application in accordance with law. In the

¶32

B.A.No. 3527 OF 2011

¶33

: 2 :

¶34

meanwhile if the petitioners are arrested they shall be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum. If in case the Magistrate has doubt about the genuineness or correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned Magistrate can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties and on the following further conditions:

¶35

i. The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer and that they should appear before the investigating officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.

¶36

ii. The petitioners shall produce their original passport before the learned Magistrate. If they are not having any valid passport, they should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Magistrate.

¶37

iii. The petitioners will also file an affidavit that they will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that they will not commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case and that they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts

¶38

B.A.No. 3527 OF 2011

¶39

: 3 :

¶40

of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶41

iv. The petitioners and the sureties shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without the prior permission of the learned Magistrate.

¶42

v. The learned Magistrate will also ensure the identity of the petitioners and the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/Driving licence etc.

¶43

vi. Petitioners will furnish the correct residential address

¶44

and should also make available land phone number/mobile number or contact number. The petitioners shall not shift the residence without intimating the Investigating Officer and the learned Magistrate.

¶45

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶46

dmb

Majeed and Another v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Majeed and Another v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asura Beevi &Another Vs State of Kerala

Najima Beevi Vs State of Kerala

Vahid Vs the State of Kerala

Sindhu Vs State of Kerala

K.Sathi Vs State of Kerala

T.D.Joseph Vs State of Kerala