Partly allowed

Noufal v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Jan 2018Bail Appl./91/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a bail application filed by three accused persons in a violent public offences case. The court dismissed bail for the two accused directly linked to assault injuries but granted pre-arrest bail to the third accused subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to 3rd petitioner subject to bond and strict conditions; bail dismissed for 1st and 2nd petitioners.

Noufal Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 27TH POUSHA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 91 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO.2164/2017 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED-A1 TO 3:

¶8

1 NOUFAL, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KALAM, PUTHUVILA VEEDU, ERAPPIL, MUTHAYIL, MANKODU VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶9

2 NIZAM, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.SAINUDHEENKALAM, VADAKKATHIL VEEDU, KONDOTTY, KUMMIL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶10

3 NAVAS, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.THAHIRA BEEVI, THITTARIKATHU VEEDU, ERAPPIL, MANKODU VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV.SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR

¶12

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶13

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

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

mbr/

¶17

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.

¶18

B.A.No.91 of 2018

¶19

Dated this the 17^th day of January, 2018

¶20

ORDER

¶21

1.This petition is filed under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶22

2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.2164 of 2017 of the Kadakkal Police Station, registered alleging offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 294(b), 324, 308 read with Sec.149 of the IPC.

¶23

3.Prosecution allegation is that on 2.12.2017, at 9 p.m, the petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the informant with a stick causing injuries.

¶24

4.The learned counsel asserts that the petitioners are innocent. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer. It is submitted that the informant was assaulted with a stick by the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 and he had sustained several injuries on his body. However, no overt act is attributed to the 3^rd petitioner.

¶25

5.I have considered the submissions and gone through the case diary. It appears that the victim had sustained several

¶26

B.A.No.91 of 2018 2

¶27

injuries and those injuries have been inflicted by the petitioner Nos.1 & 2. I find no reason to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner Nos.1 & 2. However, that is not the case with the third petitioner. No serious allegations are seen levelled against him. I am therefore inclined to grant pre arrest bail to the 3^rd petitioner.

¶28

In the result, this petition is partly allowed. This petition insofar as it concerns the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 will stand dismissed. The third petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail.

¶29

However, it shall be subject to the following conditions.

¶30

i).The 3^rd petitioner 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.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum.

¶31

ii)The 3^rd petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed.

¶32

iii)The 3^rd petitioner 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.

¶33

iv)The 3^rd petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶34

B.A.No.91 of 2018 3

¶35

v) If he surrenders before the court concerned, this order shall not be applicable and the jurisdictional court may pass appropriate orders.

¶36

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders

¶37

in accordance with the law.

¶38

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶39

//True Copy\

¶40

P.A to Judge

¶41

IAP

Noufal v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Noufal 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

Raziya Salam Vs State of Kerala

Nujab Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Anas Vs State of Kerala

Suresh M.G Vs Superintendent of Police, Kottayam

Thulaseedharan Pillai Vs State of Kerala

Jospin Raj Vs State of Kerala