Allowed

Muhammed Shahid v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Feb 2016Bail Appl./195/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Muhammad Shahid, an accused in a case under Section 379 IPC and Section 20 of the Protection of River Banks and Sand Act for transporting river sand. Considering his involvement in a similar prior crime, bail was granted subject to strict reporting and bonding conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on executing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties, appearing for interrogation within ten days, and reporting every Tuesday for two months.

Muhammed Shahid Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/12TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 195 of 2016 () ------------------------------

¶6

CRIME NO. 1015/2015 OF KUTTIPURAM POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

MUHAMMED SHAHID AGED 26 YEARS S/O.MUHAMMED ALI, KADUNGANKUNNATH HOUSE, MAROOR P.O. VATTAKKULAM PANCHAYATH, TIRUR TALUK MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUTTIPPURAM POLICE STATION MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 571.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SMT T.Y.LALIZA

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶16

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

¶17

B.A.No.195 of 2016

¶18

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

¶19

Dated this the 1^st day of February, 2016

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Petitioner herein is the accused in Crime No.1015 of 2015 of Kuttippuram Police Station for offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 20 of the Protection of River Banks and Sand Act.

¶22

The allegation of the prosecution is that on 30.11.2015 at about 4.30.p.m, petitioner was found transporting river sand from Bharatapuzha river in a tipper lorry. Seeing the police party, he escaped from the scene. He seeks anticipatory bail.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the petitioner is involved in yet another crime of similar nature in which he has been granted anticipatory bail. It appears that the incident in both the cases happened on the nearby dates. Having regard to the entire facts of the case, I feel that bail can be granted to him subject to the following conditions.

¶24

(i) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. If he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on he

¶25

B.A.195/16

¶26

¶27

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each.

¶28

(ii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Tuesdays between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. for a period of two months from the date of execution of the bond as above.

¶29

(iii) He shall not get involved in any other identical offence and shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the de facto complainant or his witnesses.

¶30

The anticipatory bail application is allowed as above.

¶31

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS Judge

¶32

Sbna/1/2/16

¶33

True Copy

¶34

P A to Judge

Muhammed Shahid v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Shahid 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

Sarjas Vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar @ Kochani Vs State of Kerala

Raveendran V.P. Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Sundaran Vs State of Kerala

Baburaj Vs State of Kerala

Jithin Kurian Vs State of Kerala