Allowed

Ahemmed Kutty N v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Aug 2011Bail Appl./5477/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused of obstructing and abusing a Commissioner under Sections 353 and 506 IPC, subject to executing a bond and complying with specific reporting conditions after they satisfied the court that interim directions were complied with.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to executing a bond of Rs 10,000 each with two sureties and complying with conditions such as reporting to the IO on alternate Mondays and not influencing witnesses.

Ahemmed Kutty N 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 K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5477 of 2011()

¶6

¶7

(CRIME NO.452 OF 2011 OF KONDOTTY POLICE STATION)

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶9

¶10

AHEMMED KUTTY.N., S/O.VEERAN HAJI, NEDUMBALLY HOUSE, NEDIYIRIPPU AMSOM DESOM, ERANADU TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

MUHAMMEDALI.C., S/O.LATE KUNHIMUTTY MASTER, CHEMBAN HOUSE, KONDOTTY AMSOM DESOM, ERANADU TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.S.MANU

¶13

SMT.K.DEEPA (PAYYANUR)

¶14

RESPONDENT(S): STATE & COMPLAINANT

¶15

¶16

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶17

STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KONDOTTY POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 673638.

¶18

BY P.P.SRI.TEKCHAND

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

K.T.SANKARAN, J .

¶21

B.A. No.5477 OF 2011

¶22

Dated this the 3^rd day of August, 2011

¶23

ORDER

¶24

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.452 of 2011 of the Kondotty Police Station.

¶25

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 353 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶26

When the Bail Application came up for admission on 25^th July, 2011, the following order was passed:

¶27

“3. The allegation is that on 25.6.2011 when the Commissioner inspected the property involved in O.S.No.171 of 2011, Sub Court, Manjeri, the Commissioner was obstructed by the petitioners and she was abused by them. The petitioners apprehend arrest.

¶28

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they met the Advocate Commissioner and explained

¶29

B.A. No.5477 OF 2011

¶30

¶31

matters and even apologized for the inconvenience caused to the defacto complainant. It is submitted that the Advocate Commissioner has no grievance as of now.

¶32

5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, 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 29^th July, 2011.

¶33

6. Post on 3^rd August, 2011.

¶34

7. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.452 of 2011 of the Kondotty Police Station, till 3^rd August, 2011.

¶35

The petitioners shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.”

¶36

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

¶37

petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 25^th July, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioners.

¶38

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 25^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

¶39

B.A. No.5477 OF 2011

¶40

¶41

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

¶42

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:

¶43

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;

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

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

¶48

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶49

above.

¶50

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE .

¶51

cms

Ahemmed Kutty N v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahemmed Kutty N 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

M/S.Southern Weighing Instruments (P)Ltd Vs State of Kerala

Noorjahan Vs State of Kerala

Nishad Vs the State of Kerala

B.Biju Vs Geetha and Others

Umeshan Vs State of Kerala

Arafath Vs State of Kerala