Allowed

Mohemmed Shahid v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Apr 2016Bail Appl./2431/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted bail to the first accused in a case involving Sections 326 and 307 IPC. The applicant was arrested on 19.02.2016. The court considered the petitioner's first-time offender status and the completion of investigation. Bail was allowed on a bond of Rs.30,000 with two sureties, subject to reporting conditions and prohibitions on further offences or tampering.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on a bond of Rs. 30,000 with two solvent sureties, each for Rs. 30,000, subject to specified reporting and conduct conditions.

Mohemmed Shahid Vs State of Kerala — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL 2016/26TH CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2431 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 728/2015 OF SREEKRISHNAPURAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

MOHEMMED SHAHID P.T., AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.HASSAN, PANAGATTUTHODIYIL HOUSE, PERINTHALAMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.SREENIVASAN SRI.K.A.SREEJITH

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SREEKRISHNAPURAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.T.Y.LALIZA

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-04-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

msv/

¶15

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

¶16

B.A. No.2431 of 2016

¶17

Dated this the 15^th day of April, 2016

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.728/2015 of Sreekrishnapuram Police Station, registered for the offence under Sections 326 and 307 of IPC.

¶20

The petitioner has filed this application under Section 439 Cr.P.C

¶21

The prosecution allegation is that on 21.9.2015 at 5 p.m., the petitioner and the other accused in furtherance of their common object, attacked the de facto complainant with chopper, iron pipe etc. as there was a dispute in the matter of construction of a hospital belonging to the de facto complainant. The petitioner was arrested on 19.2.2016 and ever since he has been in custody.

¶22

B.A.No.2431 of 2016

¶23

: 2 :

¶24

Heard.

¶25

It has been submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is not involved in any other offence of similar nature. A counter case had also been registered in connection with the incident in this case. It appears that a major part of the investigation as regards the petitioner, is almost complete. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the period of detention of the petitioner and also taking into consideration of the fact that the petitioner is a first time offender, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶26

In the result, this bail application stands allowed and the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate and subject to the following further conditions:

¶27

The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Wednesday and Sunday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for 3 months and thereafter, on every Monday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for another 3 months

¶28

B.A.No.2431 of 2016

¶29

: 3 :

¶30

and thereafter, as and when required by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.

¶31

The petitioner shall not get involved in similar offences while he is on bail.

¶32

The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation.

¶33

I make it clear that if the petitioner violates any of the conditions mentioned above, the learned Magistrate shall be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner to cancel the bail in accordance with law without any reference to this Court as held by the Apex Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 (SC)100) .

¶34

Sd/-B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR JUDGE

¶35

ami/15/4/16

¶36

/true copy/

¶37

P.S. To Judge

Mohemmed Shahid v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohemmed 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swarlal K. Vs State of Kerala

Saleem Vs State of Kerala

Subair C. Vs State of Kerala

Suthan Vs State of Kerala

Ajith @ Renjith Vs State of Kerala

Aboobacker @ Abeek Vs State of Kerala