Allowed

Abdul Kareem v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Mar 2013Bail Appl./1823/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a bail application filed by Abdul Kareem, the fourth accused in a sexual assault case involving sections 366A and 376 IPC, ruling that continued custody was unnecessary absent specific risk of absconding by the investigating agency, while imposing strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on executing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to six specific conditions including passport submission and prohibition on leaving Kerala.

Abdul Kareem Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2013/22ND PHALGUNA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1823 of 2013 ()

¶6

(CRIME NO. 731/2012 OF VIDYA NAGAR POLICE STATION , KASARGOD DIST)

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4:

¶8

ABDUL KAREEM, AGED 29 YEARS S/O. ABDUL REHMAN, PACHAMBALLAM HOUE, PACHAMBALLAM BANDHIYODE, KAYYAR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD.

¶9

BY ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM THROUGH THE STATION HEAD OFFICER VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R.REMA

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-03-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

¶16

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 1823 OF 2013

¶17

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13^th day of March, 2013

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner is the fourth accused in Crime No. 731 of 2012 of Vidyanagar Police Station who is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 120B, 366A and 376 read with 34 of IPC and Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

¶20

The allegation against the petitioner is that he made arrangements for the other persons to sexually assault the victim.

¶21

The petitioner would say that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated. At any rate, according to him, he has been in custody from 18.01.2013 onwards and his continued custody is unnecessary.

¶22

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and pointed out that the investigation is going on .

¶23

The CD was made available for perusal. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶24

B.A.No.1823/2013

¶25

-2-

¶26

learned Public Prosecutor and having perused the records, the claim of the petitioner that he is innocent cannot be countenanced. There are materials to show that he had a role to play in the incident. A probe into the veracity of the allegations are not warranted at this point of time. However, the petitioner has been in custody from 18.01.2013 onwards and his continued custody appears to be unnecessary, since no apprehension is expressed by the investigating agency that if the petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to abscond.

¶27

The petition is allowed as follows:

¶28

i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the JFCM Court concerned.

¶29

ii) The learned Magistrate shall ensure the identity of the sureties and also the veracity of the tax receipts before granting bail.

¶30

B.A.No.1823/2013

¶31

-3-

¶32

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Wednesday between 9 am and 10 am until further orders.

¶33

iv) The petitioner shall produce his original passport before the learned Magistrate. If he is not having any valid passport, he should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Magistrate.

¶34

v) The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witness.

¶35

vi) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala.

¶36

vii) If any of the condition is violated, the bail granted shall stand cancelled and the JFCM Court, on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such proceedings as are available to him in law.

¶37

P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE

¶38

Abdul Kareem v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Kareem 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

Renjith Vs State

M.K.Siddique Vs State of Kerala

Manoj Vs State of Kerala

Saji P. Daniel Vs State of Kerala

Shahul Hammeed K. Vs the Sub Inspector of Police, Mayyil Police Station

Abdul Kareem Vs State of Kerala