Allowed

Muhammed Zakariya P. @ Jakki v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Sept 2014Bail Appl./6558/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Responding to a regular bail application under Section 439 CrPC for an accused detained since July 8, 2014, in a rape and hurt case. The court allowed bail after viewing medical reports, deeming continued detention unnecessary as investigation custody may be exhausted, subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted on executing a bond for Rs. 35,000 with two solvent sureties each for the like amount subject to specified conditions.

Muhammed Zakariya P. @ Jakki Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/25TH BHADRA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6558 of 2014 () -------------------------------

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 5811/2014 of J.M.F.C.-1,KASARAGOD DATED 13-08-2014 CRIME NO. 489/2014 OF MANJESWAR POLICE STATION, KASARGOD

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/IST ACCUSED:

¶8

MUHAMMED ZAKARIYA P. @ JAKKI, AGED 24 YEARS S/O ABDULLA, RIFA MANZIL, SUNNADA BAYAR CHIPPAR VILLAGE (REPRESENTED BY SRI A.M. ABDUL JAMAL, ADVOCATE, KASARAGOD)

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL SRI.A.S.SREEJAN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM 682031 (CRIME NO 489 OF 2014 OF MANJESWARAM POLICE STATION)

¶12

KASARGODU DISTRICT

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SMT.R.REMA

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

ami/

¶16

V.K.MOHANAN, J.

¶17

B.A.No.6558 of 2014

¶18

Dated this the 16^th day of September, 2014.

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

As the petitioner, who is the 1^st accused in Crime No.489/14 of Manjeswaram Police Station, is undergoing incarceration from 7.8.2014 onwards, he preferred this application for regular bail under section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶22

The prosecution allegation is that on 5.8.2014 at 3 p.m., all the accused in the above crime, including the petitioner herein, in furtherance of their common intention, had wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and thereafter the 1^st accused/petitioner caused injuries to the de facto complainant by using blade and thereafter committed rape on the de facto complainant and thus all the accused, including the petitioner herein, had

¶23

B.A.No.6558 of 2014

¶24

¶25

committed offences punishable under sections 341, 324, 506(i), 376 r/w 34 of IPC.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the petitioner as well as the de facto complainant were lovers and he is implicated in the above crime due to political enemity towards the petitioner, as he had left the party to which the de facto complainant's relatives are members and are associated. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner along with other accused had restrained the de facto complainant and after inflicting injuries on the de facto complainant by using a blade, the petitioner herein has committed rape on the de facto complainant.

¶27

I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor made available to me the CD file in the above crime and I have perused the same. After perusal of the medical report and in view of

¶29

B.A.No.6558 of 2014

¶30

¶31

the fact that the petitioner was arrested as early as on 7.8.2014, according to me, the continued detention of the petitioner is not required, especially when custody of the petitioner for the purpose of investigation might have been over after the arrest of the petitioner on 7.8.2014. I am not proposed to say anything on merit on the basis of the endorsement contained in the medical report in the present case. Therefore, according to me, this petition can be allowed by imposing appropriate conditions so as to safeguard the interest of the prosecution.

¶32

In the result, this petition is allowed, granting bail. Accordingly, there will be a direction to release the petitioner on bail, on his executing a bond for Rs.35,000/with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kasaragod, and on the following other conditions.

¶33

The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer in the above crime, between 10 and 11 a.m. on Sundays once in a fortnight.

¶34

B.A.No.6558 of 2014

¶35

¶36

The petitioner is directed to surrender his Passport before the Investigating Officer at the time of execution of bond and if he is not having the Passport, file an affidavit to that effect in the said court. The petitioner is free to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate for the release of the Passport as and when required and in case of an application is filed in this regard, the learned Magistrate is directed to consider the same on merit and pass appropriate orders, guided by the decision rendered by this Court in Ashok Kumar Vs. State of Kerala (2009(2) KLT 712) .

¶37

The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and he shall not interfere with the same or attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper the evidence.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

V.K.MOHANAN, Judge.

¶40

ami/

¶41

//True copy//

¶42

P.A.to Judge

Muhammed Zakariya P. @ Jakki v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Zakariya P. @ Jakki 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

Clabin @ Vipin Vs State of Kerala

Beefathima Vs State of Kerala

Anil Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Anoop Vs State of Kerala

Sijo Mathai Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Firos Vs Sub Inspector of Police