Allowed

Mohammed Rafi v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Dec 2014Bail Appl./8468/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by two accused persons involved in a criminal case regarding illegal sand transportation. The court granted bail subject to a personal bond, reporting conditions, and prohibitions on tampering with evidence or committing new offences.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on bond with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, subject to conditions for reporting, non-tampering, and non-involvement in further offences.

Mohammed Rafi 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 B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 8468 of 2014 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 369/2014 OF KOLATHUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED :

¶8

-----------------------------------

¶9

1. MOHAMMED RAFI, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O MOHAMMED ALI, POZHIKUNNATH HOUSE, MOORKANAD P.O., PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶10

2. RINSHAD, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O ABDUL NAZER, NELLIKUNNATH HOSUE, KULATHUR P.O., MOORKANAD, PERINTHALMANA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.P.SAMSUDIN SRI.JITHIN LUKOSE

¶12

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINAT :

¶13

----------------------------------------

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, RERPESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031

¶15

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SREEJITH V.S.

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶19

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

¶20

B.A. No.8468 of 2014

¶21

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

¶22

Dated this the 16^th day of December, 2014

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶25

Petitioners are accused in Crime No.369 of 2014 of

¶26

the Kulathur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Section 379 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 20 and 23 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001.

¶27

The allegation against the petitioners is that on 22.10.2014 at about 3.50 a.m., they were found transporting

¶28

sand illegally collected from the river without any licence or authorization by a mini lorry. On seeing the Police party, the petitioners ran away from the spot after leaving the lorry and the sand.

¶29

B.A. No.8468 of 2014 2

¶30

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

¶31

No criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioners. It seems that the sand illegally collected and the vehicle, have been seized in the case. Investigation of the case is practically over. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required in the matter as there is nothing more to be recovered. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the absence of any criminal antecedents on their part, I am of the view that this is a fit case wherein anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.

¶32

In the result, this bail application is allowed and 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 Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the officer conducting arrest, and subject to the following terms and conditions:-

¶33

B.A. No.8468 of 2014

¶34

¶35

(i) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in between 09.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. on all Fridays and Tuesdays commencing from 19.12.2014 for a period of three months or till the filing of the final report in this case, whichever is earlier.

¶36

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

¶37

(iii) The petitioners shall make themselves

¶38

available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

B. KEMAL PASHA JUDGE

¶43

DSV/16/12

¶44

// True Copy //

¶45

P.A. To Judge

Mohammed Rafi v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Rafi 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

James Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Ramees Vs the State of Kerala

Binu, S/O.Rajan Vs State of Kerala

Manoharan Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Salam Vs State of Kerala

Binu. E Vs State of Kerala