Partly allowed

A.Rasheed E.H v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Nov 2015Bail Appl./7445/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding offences under Section 420 IPC, the Court held custodial interrogation unnecessary. It granted pre-arrest bail to the second petitioner subject to conditions and dismissed the application concerning the first petitioner who was not arrayed as an accused.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted to the second petitioner with conditions; bail application dismissed concerning the first petitioner.

A.Rasheed E.H 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 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 7445 of 2015 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. NOT KNOWN OF KATTAPPANA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER :

¶8

1. RASHEED E.H.,

¶9

S/O.HASANKUNJ, AGED 57 YEARS

¶10

RESIDING AT ELLATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE KATTAPPANA P.O., KATTAPPANA-685508.

¶11

2. NAJEEB RASHEED

¶12

S/O.RASHEED E.H., AGED 27 YEARS

¶13

RESIDING AT ELLATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE KATTAPPANA P.O., KATTAPPANA-685508.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.E.A.BIJUMON

¶15

RESPONDENT :

¶16

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. REPRESENTING THE S.I. OF POLICE KATTAPPANA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶17

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y.

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

A. HARIPRASAD, J.

¶21

Bail Appl. No.7445 of 2015

¶22

Dated this the 25^th day of November 2015

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

Bail application filed under Sec.438 Cr.P.C.

¶25

Petitioners are accused nos.1 and 2 in Crime

¶26

No.1432 of 2015 of Kattappana Police station registered for the offence punishable under Sec.420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶27

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

¶28

Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the 1^st petitioner is not arrayed as an accused in this case. The allegation against the 2^nd petitioner is that there was a transaction in respect of a car and in which case, the 2^nd petitioner failed to fulfill the promise to pay money to the defacto complainant.

¶29

Considering the nature allegations, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. Hence, pre arrest bail is granted to the 2^nd petitioner with the following conditions.

¶30

In the event of arrest in Crime No.1432

¶31

Bail Appl. No.7445 of 2015 2

¶32

of 2015 of Kattappana Police station, the petitioner shall be released on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer making the arrest.

¶33

The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when directed by him in writing.

¶34

The petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses, nor shall he tamper with the evidence.

¶35

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with law without referring the matter to this Court.

¶36

The bail application as regards the 1^st petitioner is concerned is dismissed.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

NS/25/11/2015

¶39

A. HARIPRASAD JUDGE / True Copy / P.A. To Judge

A.Rasheed E.H v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Rasheed E.H 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

Kabeer Nambeesan Veettilq Vs State of Kerala

Nelliyillath Ismail Vs State of Kerala

Balakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Rejeendran @ Biju Vs State of Kerala

Shivashanmugham Vs State of Kerala

Suhara.a Vs State of Kearala