Partly allowed

Mubarak v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Nov 2015Bail Appl./6876/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application challenged allegations of assault and criminal mischief. The single-judge bench granted anticipatory bail to the second accused subject to strict conditions but directed the first accused to surrender for interrogation within two weeks before moving for bail on merits.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to 2nd petitioner with conditions; 1st petitioner directed to surrender to IO within 2 weeks.

Mubarak Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/20TH KARTHIKA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6876 of 2015 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 863/2015 OF VITHURA POLICE STATION.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:

¶8

1. MUBARAK, S/O.ABDUL RASHEED, AGED 25 YEARS, THOTTINKARA VEEDU, THOTTUMUKKU, VITHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

2. MUHAMMED, S/O.ABDUL RASHEED, AGED 28 YEARS, THOTTINKARA VEEDU, THOTTUMUKKU, VITHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER.

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R. REMA.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

rs.

¶16

A.HARIPRASAD, J.

¶17

B.A.No.6876 of 2015

¶18

------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11^th day of November, 2015

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶21

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.863 of 2015 of Vithura Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 324, 325 and 326 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Prosecution case is that on 01.10.2015 at about

¶23

03.00 hours, the accused trespassed into the house of the

¶24

defacto complainant and 1^st accused attacked him with a wooden reaper causing fracture of facial bone. Second accused punched on his face.

¶25

Heard both sides.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted

¶27

that the defacto complainant is none other than the brother-in-law of the petitioners. He was ill-treating their sister frequently. Medical records and other documents have been produced to show that the defacto complainant

¶28

B.A.No.6876 of 2015

¶29

¶30

was in the habit of drinking and thereafter, attacking his wife, that is the sister of the petitioners. It is also submitted that civil cases are pending between the parties.

¶31

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. It is submitted that the first accused used a reaper to cause fracture.

¶32

Considering the facts and circumstances and the nature of the allegations, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the second petitioner with the following conditions:

¶33

(a) In the event of arrest in Crime No.863 of 2015 of Vithura Police Station, the 2^nd petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for `25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶34

(b) The 2^nd petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required

¶35

B.A.No.6876 of 2015

¶36

¶37

for the purpose of interrogation.

¶38

¶39

investigation of the case.

¶40

(d) The 2^nd petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses.

¶41

(e) The 2^nd petitioner shall not in any manner interfere or meddle with the investigation.

¶42

(f) The 2^nd petitioner shall not, during the period of this bail get involved in any offence.

¶43

In case any of the above conditions is violated, bail granted hereby is liable to be cancelled for which the investigating officer may move application before the jurisdictional magistrate.

¶44

Insofar as the 1^st petitioner is concerned, I am not inclined to grant bail to him. Hence, the following directions are issued.

¶45

The 1^st petitioner shall surrender before the

¶46

Investigating Officer within a period of 'two

¶47

weeks' from today and submit himself for

¶48

B.A.No.6876 of 2015

¶49

¶50

interrogation. The Investigating Officer shall produce him before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction on the date of surrender itself. Thereafter, the 1^st petitioner is free to move for bail before the learned Magistrate and in that event, the learned Magistrate may consider the application on merits if possible on the date of surrender itself.

¶51

Sd/- A.HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.

¶52

¶53

/True Copy/

¶54

P.A. to Judge

Mubarak v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mubarak 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

Fareed Khan Ponnelam Vs Station House Officer, Kalpeni Police Station

Ramesan K. Vs State of Kerala

Ramakrishnan Unnithan Vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala

Jithu Devan Vs State of Kerala

Vasanthan Vs State of Kerala