Disposed

Fazalu Rahman K.K v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Jun 2016Bail Appl./4586/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam dismissed a pre-arrest bail application, holding that the main allegation concerned unauthorized sand removal under the Sand Act. The Court directed the petitioner to approach the learned Magistrate for regular bail, which shall be decided judiciously on the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Bail application disposed; petitioner directed to surrender before the Magistrate for regular bail.

Fazalu Rahman K.K Vs the State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/7TH ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 4586 of 2016 ()

¶6

CRIME NO.206/2016 OF VAZHAKKAD POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

FAZALU RAHMAN K.K,

¶9

S/O.KAMMUKUTTY, AGED 26 YEARS, KUNDANKADAVATH HOUSE, MAPRAM,

¶10

VAZHAKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶12

RESPONDENS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶13

1.THE STATE OF KERALA,

¶14

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM,

¶15

KOCHI-682031.

¶16

2.THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶17

VAZHAKKAD POLICE STATION,

¶18

MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-673640.

¶19

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REMA.R

¶20

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

mbr/

¶22

P.UBAID, J.

¶23

============================ B.A.No.4586 of 2016

¶24

============================ Dated this the 28^th day of June, 2016

¶25

ORDER

¶26

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.

¶27

B.A.No.4586 of 2016 2

¶28

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.

¶29

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.206 of 2016 of the Vazhakkad 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

Fazalu Rahman K.K v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fazalu Rahman K.K v. the 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

Abdul Gafoor Vs State of Kerala

Alex Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Sreejith Vs State of Kerala

Prabhu Krishnan Vs State of Kerala

Deepak Vs State of Kerala

Nijil Babu Vs State of Kerala