Allowed

Musthafa v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Mar 2019Bail Appl./1494/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam allowed the release of the accused who was charged with rape and sexual assault. The Court held that further detention was not required given the stage of investigation, and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail on executing a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and non-influence on witnesses and victim.

Musthafa Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1494 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO. 118/2019 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

MUSTHAFA, S/O. LATE ALI, AGED 37 YEARS, KANDACHI HOUSE, MAVICHERI, KUTTIYERI.P.O, KUTIYERI AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶12

BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BA:1494/19

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.

¶18

The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.118 of 2019 of the Taliparamba Police Station registered on 1.2.2019 under Sections 450, 354(b), 376 and 506(i) of the IPC.

¶19

The victim in the instant case is a married woman. The applicant herein is her neighbour. Sometime in the month of May, 2018, the applicant is alleged to have trespassed into her house and made an attempt to sexually abuse her. It is further alleged that the alleged act was repeated in the month of June as well. In the month of December, 2018, while she was laid up due to epilepsy, the applicant is alleged to have entered the house and subjected her to rape. Stating these allegations, a complaint was lodged on 1.2.2019, based on which the subject crime was registered.

¶20

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that there is no truth in the allegations. He would point out that as early on 13.12.2018, Crime No.1345 of 2018 was registered at his instance against the husband and near relatives of the victim. The

¶21

BA:1494/19

¶22

¶23

specific allegation in the said crime was that the applicant was wrongfully restrained and was beaten up. As a counterblast, on belated allegations, the instant crime has been registered is the submission. It is further submitted that the applicant was arrested in connected with the subject crime on 2.2.2019 and prays that he be released on bail.

¶24

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor, who opposed the prayer.

¶25

I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone

¶26

through the case diary. Though the allegations are grave, the case diary reveals that substantial progress has been achieved insofar as the investigation is concerned. No other crimes are reported against the applicant herein. Having regard to the nature of the allegations, the role assigned to the applicant, the period of detention undergone and the stage of investigation, I am of the view that his further detention in custody is not required.

¶27

In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the

¶28

BA:1494/19

¶29

¶30

like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction. The above

¶31

order shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶32

The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturdays between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m., for a period of 2 months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶33

He shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence. He shall not contact the victim or her family members.

¶34

He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶35

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 in accordance with the law.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

KRJ

Musthafa v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Musthafa 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

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Saneesh Xavier Vs State of Kerala

Akbar, Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh.S., Vs State of Kerala

T.Daniel@Thampi, Vs State of Kerala

Moosa@Babu, Vs State of Kerala