Allowed

Mohammed Shareef Pari v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Jun 2018Bail Appl./2606/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed the anticipatory bail application of the accused charged in a grievous hurt case. The court invoked its powers to avoid custodial interrogation, noting the petitioner's alleged sickness and mental ailment.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; bail granted on executing a bond of Rs.30,000 with two sureties and observance of court-routine attendance conditions.

Mohammed Shareef Pari Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶3

THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1940

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 2606 of 2018

¶5

CRIME NO.85/2018 OF MALAPPURAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM

¶6

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶7

MOHAMMED SHAREEF PARI, PARI HOUSE, MAMPARAMBA HOUSING COLONY, PATTARAKADAVU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV.SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS

¶9

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶10

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.H.O.OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶11

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J

¶14

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

¶15

B.A. No. 2606 of 2018

¶16

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

¶17

Dated this the 7^th day of June, 2018

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶20

The applicant herein is arrayed as the accused in Crime No.85 of 2018 of the Malappuram Police Station, registered under Sections 332 and 324 of the IPC.

¶21

The de facto complainant is the Village Officer of Panakkad. On 7.3.2018 at 7.30 p.m., he went to the house of the applicant for collecting arrears of revenue. It is alleged that the applicant, in a fit of rage, attacked him with wooden reaper causing injuries.

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the allegations are not true. According to the learned counsel, the applicant is a sick man and he has not committed the offence as alleged. Reference is made to Annexure-II series to substantiate his point.

¶23

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the case diary. It does not appear to me that any serious injuries were sustained by the de facto complainant. Furthermore, it appears that the applicant is

¶24

BA.2606/18

¶25

-:2:-

¶26

suffering from some mental ailment. In that view of the matter, the custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessitous.

¶27

In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶28

i) He shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 10.a.m and 1 p.m for a period of one month or till the final report is filed whichever is earlier.

¶29

ii) He 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, nor shall he tamper with the evidence.

¶30

iii) He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶31

-:3:-

¶32

BA.2606/18

¶33

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

¶34

jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the

¶35

application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶36

Sd/Raja Vijayaraghavan V., Judge

¶37

krj.8/6

¶38

//true copy//

¶39

P.A to Judge

Mohammed Shareef Pari v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Shareef Pari 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

Althaf Vs State of Kerala

Munavar Vs the Excise Inspector

Fahid Vs State of Kerala

Thoufeek Vs State of Kerala

Nrebinraj P.G. Vs the State of Kerala

Dr.Muhammed Anil Vs State of Kerala