Partly allowed

Asbir P.K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Jun 2017Bail Appl./2748/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 438 CrPC dismissed for petitioners 1 and 2 who were already arrested. Grant of bail to petitioners 3 and 4, who were not specifically charged with overt acts, subject to conditions including appearance before IO and passing of passport.

What did the court decide?

Bail dismissed for petitioners 1 and 2; bail allowed for petitioners 3 and 4 subject to conditions of appearance, non-inducement, and passport surrender.

Asbir P.K Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/17TH JYAISHTA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2748 of 2017 () ------------------------------CRIME NO. 372/2017 OF PERAMBRA POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE

¶6

PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1-4:

¶7

ASBIR P.K AGED 26, S/O.AMMAD KOYA, KOTHODUKANDI MEETHAL HOUSE, KARUVANNUR P.O., NADUVANNUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 2. ANAS, AGED 22, S/O.T P NASAR, CRECSENT HOUSE, VALOOR, P.O. CHENOLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 3. MUNEER, AGED 26, S/O.IBRAHIM, ORONGIL MEETHAL HOUSE, NOCHAD P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 4. RAMSHAD, AGED 28, S/O.PAKKAR, EDAVALATHKANDI MEETHAL HOUSE, VELLIYUR, NOCHAD P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT BY ADVS.SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SRI.V.VINAY

¶8

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶9

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031

¶10

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SMT.MAYA M.N.

¶11

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 0706-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

SKS

¶13

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J

¶14

B.A. No. 2748 of 2017

¶15

Dated this the 7^th day of June, 2017

¶16

ORDER

¶17

1.This application is filed under section 438 of the Code of

¶18

Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.

¶19

2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in

¶20

Crime No. 372 of 2017 of Perambra Police Station registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 308 r/w Section 149 of the IPC.

¶21

3.According to the prosecution on 04.04.2017, while the defacto complainant, who is a member of DYFI was on his way back in a Motor Cycle along with his friend, the petitioners herein along with 15 others, who could be identified at sight wrongfully restrained them. It is alleged that the accused No 1 and 2 assaulted the victim with iron road and other weapons and the other accused

¶22

B.A.No.2748 of 2017 2

¶23

gave them assistance .

¶24

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as

¶25

well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶26

5.The learned counsel would submit that accused Nos. 1 and 2, against whom specific overt acts are alleged have already been arrested by the Police. Referring to the FI statement, it is pointed out by the learned counsel that in so far as the petitioners 3 and 4 are concerned, the de facto complainant has no case that they had used any weapon to cause any injury

¶27

6.The learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand, submitted that the petitioners had also a role to play in the incident. I have considered the submissions advanced. I have gone through the case diary as well. After going through the FI statement, I find that no specific allegation has been raised against petitioners 3 and 4 herein. Since it is borne out from the records that

¶28

B.A.No.2748 of 2017 3

¶29

the accused Nos. 1 and 2 have been arrested, I find that the relief can be granted for bail to the petitioners 3 and

¶30

4, who are arrayed as the accused Nos. 3 and 4 in the crime.

¶31

7.The application, so far as concerned the petitioners 1 and

¶32

2 will stand dismissed and so far as the petitioners 3 and

¶33

4 will stand allowed and they shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions :

¶34

(i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. If they are proposed to be arrested, they shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum.

¶35

(ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

¶36

(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m

¶37

B.A.No.2748 of 2017 4

¶38

and 11.00 a.m on every saturday henceforth for a period of two months or till the final report is filed whichever is earlier.

¶39

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶40

(vi) The petitioners shall surrender their passport before the jurisdictional court concerned or if they do not possess a passport they shall file an affidavit to that effect within five days of their release.

¶41

(vii) If they surrenders before the Magistrate, this order shall not be applicable and the learned Magistrate may pass appropriate orders.

¶42

(viii) In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the concerned court on being noticed of that fact will be empowered to cancel the bail.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶45

SKS

¶46

//TRUE COPY//

¶47

P.A. TO JUDGE

Asbir P.K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asbir P.K 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

Lizzy Thomas Vs State of Kerala

K.C. Lakshman Raj Vs State of Kerala

Shemeer Vs State of Kerala

Madhu Vs State of Kerala

M.K. Dhanil Vs State of Kerala

Hanis M.B. Vs State of Kerala