Disposed

Muhammad Hilal Buyya, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Jun 2019Crl.MC/3520/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court modified stringent payability of bail conditions imposed on a foreign national accused. The petitioners landline number requirement discharged against his present residence lack of facility. Investigating officer directed to produce seized passport and visa within five days for verification by trial magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Condition requiring landline number set aside; investigating officer directed to produce seized passport and visa before magistrate within five days.

Muhammad Hilal Buyya, 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 07TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3520 of 2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.04.2019 IN CRL.MP.NO.2692/2019 IN CRL.M.C.549/2019 ON THE FILES OF THE SESSIONS JUDGE, THALASSERY

¶7

CRIME NO.443/2018 OF KANNUR CITY POLICE STATION, KANNUR

¶8

PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

MUHAMMAD HILAL BUYYA, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMAD SAYID BUYYA, PASCHIM BANIYAKKALI P.O., RAYANTH MORAL GANCH VILLAGE, SARANKOLA SUB DISTRICT, BAHARKAT DISTRICT BANGLADESH PRESENTLY RESIDING AT MUHAMMED HILAL BUYYA, C/O. ABOOBACKER HYDROSE JUMA MASJID, MAHALL COMMITTEE QUARTERS, CHANMASSERRY PARA, AZHEEKODE, KANNUR-670 009.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.SATHEESHAN ALAKKADAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶12

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

¶13

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CRIME NO. 443/2018 OF KANNUR CITY POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 663.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.06.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3548/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

CRL.Mcs.3520 & 3548 of 2019

¶17

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶19

PRESENT

¶20

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶21

FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1941

¶22

Crl.MC.No. 3548 of 2019

¶23

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P. NO.2693/2019 IN CRL.MC NO.548/2019 ON THE FILES OF THE SESSIONS JUDGE, THALASSERY DATED 10-04-2019

¶24

CRIME NO. 442/2018 OF KANNUR CITY POLICE STATION, KANNUR

¶25

PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶26

MUHAMMAD HILAL BUYYA, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED SAYID BUYYA, PASCHIM BANIYAKKALI, P.O RAYANTH, MORAL GANCH VILLAGE, SARANKOLA SUB DISTRICT, BHARKAT DISTRICT BANGLADESH, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT MUHAMMED HILAL BUYYA, C/O. ABOOBACKER, HYDROSE JUMA MASJID MAHALL COMMITTEE QUARTERS, CHANMASSERRY PARA, AZHEEKODE, KANNUR-670 009.

¶27

BY ADV. SRI.SATHEESHAN ALAKKADAN

¶28

RESPONDENTSCOMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶29

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

¶30

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, (CRIME NO.442/2018 OF KANNUR CITY POLICE STATION), KANNUR DISTRICT-670 663.

¶31

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI

¶32

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.06.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3520/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

CRL.Mcs.3520 & 3548 of 2019

¶34

¶35

ORDER

¶36

The petitioner herein is the accused in Crime Nos.443 and 442 of 2018 registered at the Kannur City Police Station, alleging offences punishable under Sections 457, 461 and 395 of the IPC. He is admittedly a citizen of Bangladesh. The petitioner was granted statutory bail by the Court of Session on 23.03.2019 after undergoing prolonged incarceration. In view of certain conditions imposed by the learned Sessions Judge, he has not been able to secure his release from the prison. The petitioner is seriously aggrieved by condition Nos. (1) & (2) of the order, which read as follows.

¶37

“(1) The petitioner has to produce documents before the trial Magistrate to show that he is in possession of legal and valid documents to move around India.

¶38

(2) The petitioner has to produce the permanent address of his residence at Kannur along with the landline number of his phone in that address.”

¶39

According to the petitioner, on his arrest, his passport and

¶40

the VISA issued from his country were seized from his possession by the police. In view of the above, he is unable to produce them before

¶41

the jurisdictional Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner was residing in the Hydrose Juma Masjid Quarters under the supervision of Aboobacker, but the said institution has no landline number. He is,

¶42

CRL.Mcs.3520 & 3548 of 2019

¶43

¶44

therefore, unable to comply with that condition as well. It is further submitted that the petitioner is prepared to comply with all the other conditions such as the one in which he has been asked to furnish local sureties and to appear before the Investigating Officer on all days. Seeking modification of the above conditions, the petitioner approached the learned Sessions Court, but the same was rejected.

¶45

The learned Public Prosecutor has filed a statement, wherein it is stated that the petitioner is accused of having committed very serious offences. It is further submitted that at the time of his arrest, a Bangladesh Passport bearing No. BX0268435 issued on 2.10.2018 from Dhaka as well as a VISA was seized. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, the police have approached the concerned authorities to ascertain whether those documents are valid. However, they have not received any response till date.

¶46

I have considered the submissions advanced.

¶47

The petitioner is aged 19 years and is a citizen of a foreign

¶48

country. Even according to the prosecution, the passport and VISA which were found in his possession were seized at the time of his arrest on 22.12.2018. It was after prolonged incarceration that he was granted bail by imposing very stringent conditions. I am unable to

¶49

CRL.Mcs.3520 & 3548 of 2019

¶50

¶51

accept the submission of the learned Public Prosecutor that they have not received any information about the genuineness of the passport and the VISA till date. I am inclined to suitably modify the conditions.

¶52

In view of the above, condition No.(2) of the order dated 23.02.2019 directing the petitioner to furnish landline number of the phone will stand set aside. However, he shall furnish the details of his residence and shall not remove himself from that place until the said condition is suitably modified. Insofar as the condition No.(1) is concerned, it is ordered that the Investigating Officer shall produce the seized passport as well as VISA before the learned Magistrate within a period of five days from today. The learned Magistrate shall retain the passport as well as the seized documents. A report shall thereafter be obtained from the competent authorities as expeditiously as possible. If the passport as well as the seized documents are found not to be genuine, the bail granted to the petitioner will liable to be cancelled.

¶53

Subject to such modifications, these petitions are disposed of.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

¶56

krj

¶57

CRL.Mcs.3520 & 3548 of 2019

¶58

¶59

APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 3520/2019

¶60

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶61

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.3.2019 IN CRL.M.C. 549 OF COURT OF SESSIONS, THALASSERY.

¶62

ANNEXURE AII

¶63

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.4.2019 IN CRL M.P 2692/2019 IN CRL.M.C. 549/2019 OF SESSIONS JUDGE THALASSERY.

¶64

APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 3548/2019

¶65

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶66

ANNEXURE AI TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.3.2019 IN CRL.M.C.548 OF COURT OF SESSIONS, THALASSERY.

¶67

ANNEXURE AII

¶68

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.4.2019 IN CRL.M.P.2693/2019 IN CRL.M.C.548/2019 OF SESSIONS JUDGE THALASSERY.

Muhammad Hilal Buyya, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammad Hilal Buyya, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.U.Sarala Vs Gopi

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Ollaril Gopinatha Suni @ O.G.Sunil

Bineeth @ Karimani Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Nihal P., Vs State of Kerala

Baby Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Nissam Nazzar Vs State of Kerala