Allowed

Anwar Thasli.P v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC30 Nov 2018Bail Appl./6403/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This anticipatory bail application was filed by the second accused in a case under Sections 294, 308, and 34 IPC. The petition, seeking pre-arrest bail based on a limited role, was allowed with conditions to appear for interrogation, refrain from intimidation, and not commit further offences.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on conditions to appear for interrogation, not to intimidate witnesses, and execute bond of 40,000/- with two sureties if arrested.

Anwar Thasli.P Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY ,THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940 Bail Appl..No. 6403 of 2018

¶5

CRIME NO. 406/2018 OF VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, KASARGOD

¶6

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

¶7

ANWAR THASLI.P AGED 31 YEARS S/O ABOOBACKER, PUTHIYADUKAM HOUSE, CHATTAMEHAL, THEKKIL, KASARAGOD

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD SRI.K.V.SASIDHARAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶10

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

¶11

PP. SRI. C.K. PRASAD

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

Bail Appl..No. 6403 of 2018

¶14

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

Petitioner is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.406/2016 of Vidyanagar Police Station, Kasaragod District for offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 308 read with Section 34 of IPC. According to the de facto complainant, on 11.09.2018 evening, while the de facto complainant was proceeding along the road, accused Nos.1 and 2 came on a scooter, intercepted him and the 1^st accused slashed a knife against the neck of the de facto complainant. He escaped the attack. Complaint was laid and crime was registered. Apprehending arrest, petitioner seeks bail.

¶17

2. The main allegation is attributed to the 1^st accused. It is reported that he has been

¶18

arrested. Considering the limited role attributed to the petitioner, I am inclined to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Hence, the anticipatory bail application is

¶20

Bail Appl..No. 6403 of 2018

¶21

¶22

allowed on the following conditions:

¶23

(i) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on he executing a bond for a sum of 40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with₹ two sureties for the like sum each.

¶24

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

¶25

(iii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for and co-operate with the investigation.

¶26

(iv) He shall not get involved in any other identical offence and the involvement if any, will be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶29

Pn 30/11

Anwar Thasli.P v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anwar Thasli.P 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

Musthafa Vs State of Kerala

Hashir K Vs the State of Kerala

Shamshad Vs State of Kerala

Rameshan K. Vs State of Kerala

Adil Bin Salim Vs the Sub Inspector of Police, Ernakulam Central Station

Bilal Saji Vs State of Kerala