Allowed

Nazeema v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Dec 2018Bail Appl./2932/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted pre-arrest bail to Nazeema, the fifth accused, charged with offences including criminal intimidation and assault IPC. The court held custodial interrogation was not essential and imposed conditions regarding surrender and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted on conditions of surrender within ten days, execution of bond with sureties, and prohibition of interference with witnesses.

Nazeema Vs State of Kerala — Domestic Violence | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 05TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2932 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 845/2018 OF Adoor Police Station , Pathanamthitta

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED 5:

¶8

NAZEEMA

¶9

AGED 55 ,W/O. LATE BASHERKUTTY, KANJIRATHUMMOOTTIL, PADIYATETHIL,KALAPPAN CHIRA, PALLIKKAL,ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.NOBEL RAJU

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682 031.REPRESENTING THE SHO,ADOOR,PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SR.PP CHANDRASENAN

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Bail Appl..No. 2932 of 2018

¶17

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner herein is arrayed as the fifth accused in crime No.845/2018 of Adoor police station for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506, 341, 323, 324, 308 and 34 of IPC.

¶20

According to the the defacto complainant, he was maintaining a strained relationship with his wife. The children were with the mother-in-law. He was informed by the mother-inlaw that the children have come to the house and that they are available. To meet them, the defacto complainant is stated to have proceeded to the mother-in-law's house. The relatives of the wife wrongfully restrained him and attacked him. It is alleged that the petitioner herein masterminded the attack and after inviting the defacto complainant to her house, he was assaulted.

¶21

The main allegations are attributed to the other accused, who have inflicted the injuries. There is no direct evidence to show that the petitioner herein is involved.

¶22

Having considered these facts, I do not feel that a custodial interrogation of the petitioner herein is absolutely essential. Hence, I am inclined to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner herein on the following conditions:

¶23

Bail Appl..No. 2932 of 2018

¶24

¶25

(i) Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer within ten days from today. After interrogation and identification, if any, if the petitioner is proposed to be arrested, she shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of 40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with₹ two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶26

(ii) She shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant or the witnesses.

¶27

(iii) She shall not get involved in any other crime.

¶28

(iv) She shall co-operate with the investigation.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

shg

Nazeema v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazeema 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

Anwar Vs State of Kerala

Aswathi Unnikrishnan Vs the State of Kerala

K. Abhilash Vs State of Kerala

Shafeela Vs the State of Kerala

V.R.Unnikrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Mookaiah S. Vs State of Kerala