Allowed

Haseem v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jul 2011Bail Appl./5313/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused of offences under the Indian Penal Code. The court observed that the petitioners had complied with a prior direction to appear before the investigating officer and imposed standard conditions including regular reporting and a surety bond.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two solvent sureties, subject to conditions of reporting, interrogation, and non-interference.

Haseem Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2011 / 30TH ASHADHA 1933

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 5313 of 2011()

¶5

----------------------------------------CRIME NO.475/2011 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT ------------------------------

¶6

PETITIONERS(A1 AND A2)

¶7

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

¶8

1. HASEEM, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.AHAMMED, CHERIKKUZHIYIL HOUSE, KOLLAM P.O., PARAPPALLY, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE.

¶9

2. RAGESH, S/O.RAVEENDRAN NAIR, VARERANKANDY, NADERI, ARRIKKULAM P.O., KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN SRI.S.K.SAJU

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT

¶12

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

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOYILANDY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

sts

¶17

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶18

B.A.No.5313 of 2011

¶19

Dated this the 21^st day of July, 2011

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.475 of 2011 of Koyilandy Police Station.

¶22

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 452, 341, 323 & 427 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

The prosecution case is that on 04/06/2011, the accused persons forcibly entered into the tea shop of the de facto complainant, ransacked the shop, attacked de facto complainant and caused loss to the de facto complainant to a tune of `12,000/-(Rupees Twelve thousand only).

¶24

When the Bail Application came up for admission on

¶25

8^th July, 2011, the following order was passed:

¶26

B.A.No.5313 of 2011

¶27

¶28

“4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offences, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioners should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer on 15/07/2011 and 16/07/2011.”

¶29

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 8^th July, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioners.

¶30

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 8^th July, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioners, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶31

B.A.No.5313 of 2011

¶32

¶33

a) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders;

¶34

b) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required;

¶35

c) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

¶36

d) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail.

¶37

e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶38

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶39

above.

¶40

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶41

cms

Haseem v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haseem 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dittomon Alias Pappachan and Another Vs the State and Another

George Kutty Vs State of Kerala

Sekh Saraffaizudin @ Sarpharaj Vs State of Kerala

Binu P.M. and Another Vs the State of Kerala

Berlin @ Selvin Vs State of Kerala

Vinod and Another Vs State of Kerala