Dismissed

Kammadom Razack and Another v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Jun 2011Bail Appl./3715/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court declined to grant anticipatory bail in an FIR under Sections 447, 326 read with 34 IPC. The accused were directed to surrender for police interrogation by June 24 or 25, 2011, to give the investigating officer an opportunity to recover incriminating material before regular bail is considered.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to surrender before investigating officer on 24.06.2011 or 25.06.2011 for interrogation; regular bail may be applied for thereafter before Magistrate.

Kammadom Razack and Another Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 3715 of 2011()

¶5

----------------------------CRIME NO.234/2011 OF VELLARIKUNDU POLICE STATION

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACUSED NOS.1 AND 2

¶7

¶8

KAMMADAM RAZACK, KAMMADAM HOUSE, PEROLE, NEELESWARAM.

¶9

ABDUL AZEEZ, KAMMADATH HOUSE, PEROLE, NEELESWARAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SMT.CHINCY GOPAKUMAR SRI.ANWIN GOPAKUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

¶14

THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,

¶15

ERNAKULAM.

¶16

ADDL.R2 SUBAIR CH, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.K.P.ABDUL RAHIMAN, RESIDING AT KAMMADATH HOUSE, PATTLAM, PARAPPA, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶17

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶18

SRI.T.MADHU FOR ADDL.R2

¶19

# IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R2 AS PER ORDER DATED 14.06.2011 IN CRL.M.A.2959/2011

¶20

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶22

......................................... Bail Application No.3715 of 2011

¶23

.......................................... Dated: 14.06.2011 ORDER

¶24

Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.234/2011 of Vellarikundu Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 447,326 read with 34 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail.

¶25

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.

¶26

After evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 112 of the verdict of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others - (2011) 1 SCC 694 , I am of the view that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer on 24.06.2011 or on 25.06.2011 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case the petitioners are arrested by the Investigating Officer before interrogation, the petitioners shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and permitted to file an application for regular bail. In case the interrogation of the petitioners is without arresting them, the petitioners shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate or the Court concerned on the same day or the next day and apply for regular bail. The Magistrate or the

¶27

B.A. No.3715/ 2011

¶28

-:2:-

¶29

Court on being satisfied that the petitioners have been interrogated by the police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, consider and dispose of their application for regular bail preferably on the same date on which it is filed.

¶30

In case the petitioners while surrendering before the Investigating Officer have deprived the investigating officer sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall complete the interrogation even if it is beyond the time limit fixed as above and submit a report to that effect to the Magistrate or the Court concerned. Likewise, the Magistrate or the Court also will not be bound by the time limit fixed as above if sufficient time was not available after the production or appearance of the petitioners .

¶31

This petition is disposed of as above. Dated this the 14^th day of June, 2011.

¶32

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

¶33

Kammadom Razack and Another v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kammadom Razack 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagadeesh Vs State of Kerala

Pratheep @ Prabhu Vs State of Kerala

Radha E.K. Vs State and Another

Balachandran Vs State of Kerala

K.Krishnan Nair Vs State of Kerala

Jithesh Vs State of Kerala