Allowed

Shaik Fazin Haroon, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Jun 2019Bail Appl./2147/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On the first hearing of a bail application in a 498A case, where parties are undergoing Family Court mediation, the petitioner is released on bail with specific conditions preventing tampering, leaving the country, and violating agreement terms.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail Rs. 40,000 plus two sureties, subject to conditions including no foreign travel and cooperation in investigation.

Shaik Fazin Haroon, Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2147 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO. 568/2019 OF ALUVA EAST POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

SHAIK FAZIN HAROON, AGED 35 YEARS

¶9

S/O.S.A.SHAIK HAROON, OLLUKKARA P.O., KRISHNAPURAM, THRISSUR - 680 655.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL

¶11

RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶13

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA EAST POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 101.

¶14

3 MRS.ZAREENA BASHIR, W/O.SHAIK FAZIN HAROON, NOW RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.51A, SHANAVAS MANZIL, AYYAPPANKAVU P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682 018.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BHARATHAN

¶16

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1 AND R2, SRI.K.S.BHARATHAN FOR R3

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

Bail Appl..No. 2147 of 2019

¶20

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶21

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

¶22

B.A.No.2147 of 2019

¶23

============================ Dated this the 10^th day of June, 2019

¶24

The petitioner has been arrayed as the sole accused in Crime No. 568/2019 of Aluva East Police Station, which has been registered for offences punsihable under Section 498 A of the IPC.

¶25

Heard Sri.Thomas J.Anakkallunkal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and Sri. Saigi Jacob, Palatty, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.K.S.Bharatan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 (lady defacto complainant).

¶26

The instant crime has been registered on the basis of the First Information/complaint of the 3^rd respondent lady defacto complainant, who is the wife of the petitioner/accused.

¶27

The allegation of the lady is that, after her marriage she has been subjected to cruelty and harassment by the petitioner etc. When the matter had come up for consideration on 2.04.2019, this Court had requested the learned advocates appearing for the petitioner/accused and the 3^rd respondent complainant as to whether the parties are amenable for mediatory efforts as they are spouses and based on the consent of both sides the parties have been referred for mediation to be conducted by the

¶28

¶29

Bail Appl..No. 2147 of 2019

¶30

mediation centre attached to this Court. Now it is submitted by both sides that some over all agreement has been arrived at by the parties regarding the lady taking back some of her articles from the house where the spouses were staying together and since the matter required more intensive mediatory efforts, it was decided that parties will seek mediatory efforts after the institution of appropriate proceedings before the Family Court concerned.

¶31

Taking note of the above said facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that in the event of the petitioner being arrested in relation to the above said crime, he shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Fourty Thousand Only) and on his furnishing 2 solvent sureties for the like sum each, both to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer concerned. However, the grant of bail may be subject to the following conditions.

¶32

(i) The petitioners shall not involve in any criminal offences of similar nature.

¶33

(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation. (iii) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer as and when required in that connection.

¶34

(iv) The petitioner shall not influence witness or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner, whatsoever.

¶35

(v) Petitioner shall not leave the country without getting prior permission from the Judicial Magistrate's Court concerned.

¶36

(vi) If there is any violation of the abovesaid conditions by the

¶37

¶38

Bail Appl..No. 2147 of 2019

¶39

petitioner then the jurisdictional court concerned stand hereby empowered, to consider the plea for cancellation of bail at the appropriate time.

¶40

With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application will stand disposed of.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶43

Nsd //true copy// PA to Judge

¶44

JUDGE

Shaik Fazin Haroon, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Fazin Haroon, 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

Jyothi Basu, Vs the State of Kerala

Siljo Thomas Vs Soumya Sebastian

Paul, Vs State of Kerala

Shibu Damodaran Vs Sijimol

Noble Jose Vs State of Kerala

Mrs.Soorya Noushad, Vs State of Kerala