Disposed

Abdul Gafoor v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Jun 2016Bail Appl./3203/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a pre-arrest bail application by directing the petitioner to surrender before the learned Magistrate with jurisdiction to file an application for regular bail under Section 437 Cr.P.C., rather than disposing of it at the High Court level.

What did the court decide?

Bail application disposed; direction to petitioner to surrender to the learned Magistrate to apply for regular bail under Section 437 Cr.P.C. and have it decided judiciously on the date of application

Abdul Gafoor Vs State of Kerala — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/3RD ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3203 of 2016 ()

¶6

------------------------------CRIME NO. 47/2016 OF KOLATHUR POLICE STATION,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

ABDUL GAFOOR, S/O MARAKKAR, AGED 24 YEARS, POOZHITHARA HOUSE, KADAMPUZHA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLATHUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA.T.Y

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

sts

¶15

P.UBAID, J.

¶16

============================ B.A.No.3203 of 2016

¶17

============================ Dated this the 24^th day of June, 2016

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner herein seeks pre arrest bail in a crime registered under Section 379 IPC and under Section 20 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act (Sand Act). The prosecution case is that the petitioner was found illicitly transporting river sand in a vehicle. The police incorporated Section 379 IPC in the FIR on the allegation that sand was unauthorizedly removed from the river bank. On a perusal of the materials, I find that what is prominently alleged by the prosecution is unauthorized or illicit removal of river sand punishable under Section 20 of the Sand Act, which is bailable and cognizable under the law. It is settled that if the allegations constitute any offence under IPC, the police can proceed accordingly besides the prosecution under the Sand Act.

¶20

B.A.No.3203 of 2016 2

¶21

However, the main allegation will have to be looked into by the court when an application for bail comes. In the particular circumstances of this case it would be appropriate to direct the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction to take decision on the request for bail. The petitioner can very well surrender before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction, and make application under Section 437 Cr.P.C.

¶22

In the result, this bail application is disposed of, with a direction to the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction that in case application for regular bail is filed by the petitioner in Crime No.47 of 2016 of the Kolathur Police Station, the same shall be judiciously and appropriately decided on the date of

application itself.

Sd/P. UBAID, JUDGE

rkj

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

Abdul Gafoor v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Gafoor 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

A.K.Babeesh Vs the Station House Officer, Kozhikode

K.H. Abdul Salam Vs State of Kerala

Jayaraj Vs State of Kerala

Alex Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Sreejith Vs State of Kerala

Shine Madhu Vs State of Kerala