Allowed

Shamsudeen P v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC21 Nov 2014Bail Appl./8021/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench allowed a bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for two accused charged with obstructing police officials during sand mining. The court found no prior criminal antecedents and no bodily injury sustained, granting bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with bond of `25,000/- and sureties, subject to conditions to report on Tuesdays and Fridays, not tamper with evidence, and not commit new offences.

Shamsudeen P Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/30TH KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 8021 of 2014 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 456/2014 OF EDAVANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DIST.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. SHAMSUDEEN. P., AGED 28 YEARS, SON OF MOIDEEN, PALAPPETTI HOUSE, PANNIPPARA P.O., EDAVANNA VIA., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

2. JAMSEER ALI, AGED 25 YEARS, SON OF UNNEEN, PULIKKAL HOUSE, PANNIPPARA P.O., EDAVANNA VIA., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON, SMT.KAVERY S THAMPI.

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶12

1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDAVANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM - 676 541.

¶13

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI - 682 031.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.JIBU P.THOMAS.

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rs.

¶17

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶18

========================

¶19

B.A. No.8021of 2014

¶20

========================

¶21

Dated this the 21^st day of November, 2014

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

¶24

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶25

Petitioners are A4 and A3 respectively in Crime

¶26

No.456/2014 of Edavanna Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 353, 323 and 506 (1) IPC read with Section 149 IPC.

¶27

The allegation against the petitioners is that while they along with other accused were engaged in illegal sand minding, the Circle Inspector of Police, Wandoor and a Police Constable of the said Station went over there by an Innova car along with its driver and another person named Shanavas and on seeing them the petitioners and the other accused attacked them, thereby deterring the police officers from the discharge of their official duties.

¶28

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

¶29

BA No.8021/2014

¶30

: 2 :

¶31

It seems that the Circle Inspector of Police had

¶32

reached the place not by a police vehicle whereas he had reached there by a private car along with two other persons, who had allegedly involved in other sand transport cases. There is nothing to show that the petitioners or the other accused knew about the identity of the persons reached there. It seems that the defacto complainant has not explained as to how he happened to reach there by a private vehicle. It does not reveal that any of the persons had sustained any bodily injury. There is absolutely nothing to be recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required for the continued investigation of this case. Moreover, no criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioners. Considering all the above, I am of the view that this is a fit case wherein anticipatory bail can

¶33

BA No.8021/2014

¶34

: 3 :

¶35

be granted to the petitioners.

¶36

In the result, this bail application is allowed and

¶37

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:-

¶38

(i) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m.

¶39

on all Tuesdays and Fridays, commencing from 25.11.2014 for a period of three months.

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

BA No.8021/2014

¶43

: 4 :

¶44

the Investigating Officer.

¶45

(iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any

¶46

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/-

¶49

B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE

¶50

DSV/21/11

¶51

/True Copy

¶52

P.A. To Judge

Shamsudeen P v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamsudeen P v. the Sub Inspector of Police

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

Akhil Vs State of Kerala

Dhushar Vs State of Kerala

Usha Vs State of Kerala

Baby @ Roshan Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Khaleefa Vs State of Kerala