Allowed

Kunhavu Kummil v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jun 2019Bail Appl./838/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the court granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner accused of forgery. The court held that no recovery was needed and custodial interrogation was unnecessary due to the petitioner elderly age, lack of antecedents, and nature of evidence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.30,000/- with two solvent sureties, subject to specific reporting and conduct conditions.

Kunhavu Kummil Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 838 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO. 94/2019 OF Tirur Police Station , Malappuram

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

KUNHAVU KUMMIL AGED 60 YEARS S/O. KOYAKUTTY KUMMIL, KUMMIL HOUSE, POST CHENGARA, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL

¶10

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31

¶12

SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING

¶14

-2-

¶15

Bail Appl..No. 838 of 2019

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.94/2019 of Tirur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 IPC.

¶18

The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner obtained a possession certificate from Mangalam Village office and thereafter, the said certificate was produced before the Panchayat office, after correcting the entries in the possession certificate as dry land instead of wet land.

¶19

The petitioner has filed this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶20

Heard.

¶21

The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted

¶22

that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It has been further submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the certificate was produced before the Panchayat by

¶23

-3-

¶24

Bail Appl..No. 838 of 2019

¶25

the 2^nd accused for the purpose of getting permission to erect a mobile tower in the said property. The prosecution is not sure as to whether the petitioner or the 2^nd accused had committed the offence of forgery. The forged document was already seized by the Police. Therefore, no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. This being the situation, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary for the progress of investigation of the case. The petitioner is aged 60 years. That apart, the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. In the said circumstances, I am inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

¶26

In the result, this application stands allowed and the respondent is directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in the above said crime, on condition of the petitioner executing a bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only), with two

¶27

-4-

¶28

Bail Appl..No. 838 of 2019

¶29

solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned,

¶30

before whom the petitioner shall surrender within ten days, if not arrested in the meantime and subject to the following further conditions:

¶31

The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 9.00 am and 11.00 am for two months and thereafter, as and when required by the Investigating Officer for interrogation.

¶32

The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation.

¶33

The petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence during the pendency of this case.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR JUDGE

¶36

nkr/11.06.19

Kunhavu Kummil v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunhavu Kummil 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

Muhammed Haneefa, Vs the State of Kerala

C.P.Shabeer Vs State of Kerala

Dr.K.K.Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Lincy Issac, Vs State of Kerala

Gireesh C., Vs State of Kerala

Thomas.K.S., Vs State of Kerala