Allowed

Riyas v. Station House Officer

Kerala HC22 Nov 2014Bail Appl./7891/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to petitioners accused of rioting under various IPC sections, directing police to enlarge them on bond execution with specific conditions including monetary deposit, reporting, and non-interference with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail by executing bond for ₹25,000 each with two solvent sureties, depositing ₹10,000 before the lower court and adhering to reporting and non-tampering conditions.

Riyas Vs Station House Officer — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

SATURDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 7891 of 2014

¶6

CRIME NO. 531/2014 OF KUMBLA POLICE STATION, KASARGOD.

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 2,3,4 7 AND 8:

¶8

1. RIYAS, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. MOIDEENKUNHI, RIYAS MANZIL, KUMBLA MANJESHWAR TALUK, KASARAGOD.

¶9

2. ABDUL ARASHAD, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, KUNTENGARADKA HOUSE, KUMBLA, MANJESHWAR TALUK, KASARAGOD.

¶10

3. ABDUL RAHIM B.M @ RAHIM, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. B. ABDULLA, RAHIMATH MANZIL, MATTAMKUZHI, KOIPADY VILLAGE, KUMBLA, MANJESHWAR TALUK, KASARAGOD.

¶11

4. ABBAS JAFFAR @ JAFFAR, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. MOHAMMED, THAIF MANZIL, KUNTENGARADKA, KOIPADY VILLAGE, KUMBLA, MANJESHWAR TALUK, KASARAGOD.

¶12

5. ARAFATH K.K., AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, KUNTENGARADKA, KUMBLA, MANJESHWAR TALUK, KASARAGOD.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

¶14

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶15

1. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUMBLA POLICE STATION - 671 321.

¶16

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

¶17

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SREEJITH.V.S

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

mbr/

¶20

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶21

¶22

B.A. No.7891 of 2014

¶23

Dated this the 22^nd day of November, 2014

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

¶26

Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶27

Petitioners are accused Nos.2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 in

¶28

Crime No.531/2014 of Kumbla Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 308 and 427 read with Section 149 IPC.

¶29

The allegation against the petitioners and other accused is that, on 15.10.2014 at 10.30 p.m., they formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons like wooden sticks and iron rods, committed rioting and rioting armed with deadly weapons. It is alleged that they attacked the de facto complainant and his uncle, who came to the Kumbla Tourist Hotel for taking food. They inflicted serious injuries on the de facto complainant and his uncle by beating them. Not only that, they have gone to the

¶30

BA.7891/2014

¶31

: 2 :

¶32

extent of smashing the car by beating on it with wooden sticks and iron rods, thereby causing a wrongful loss of ₹50,000/- to the de facto complainant.

¶33

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

¶34

The contents of the CD, prima facie , reveal the complicity of the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that A1, A6 and A9 in the case were earlier arrested and they were subsequently enlarged on regular bail by this Court. It seems that no criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioners. The investigation of this case is practically over. The custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the continued investigation of this case. At the same time, the damages suffered by the de facto complainant has to be taken note of. By making a provision for compensating the loss sustained to the de facto complainant, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.

¶35

BA.7891/2014

¶36

: 3 :

¶37

In the result, this bail application is allowed and

¶38

the investigating officer or such other police officer, who is conducting the arrest of the petitioners, is directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest on each of them executing a bond for `25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer conducting arrest, and subject to the following terms and conditions:-

¶39

(i) Each of the petitioners shall deposit an amount of ₹10,000/- before the court below within seven days from today.

¶40

(ii) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays and Saturdays, commencing from 26.11.2014 for a period of three months.

¶41

(iii) The petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.

¶42

(iv) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required by

¶43

BA.7891/2014

¶44

: 4 :

¶45

the investigating officer.

¶46

(v) The petitioners shall not involve in any offence while on bail.

¶47

It is made clear that the violation of any of the conditions stipulated above will result in the cancellation of bail.

¶48

Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE)

¶49

aks/22/11

¶50

// True Copy //

¶51

PA to Judge

Riyas v. Station House Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riyas v. Station House Officer

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

Baby @ Roshan Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Khaleefa Vs State of Kerala

Pradeep Vs State of Kerala

Shajahan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Firose Thayyil Vs the State of Kerala