Allowed

M.H.Hameed v. Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC24 Jan 2020Bail Appl./7/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a single paragraph order granting pre-arrest bail to an accused charged with offences under the Arms Act, 1959, subject to conditions including execution of a bond with sureties and cooperation with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to execution of bond for Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, cooperation with investigation, and no inducement or tampering.

M.H.Hameed Vs Sub Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 4TH MAGHA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No.7 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.347/2016 OF Adhur Police Station , Kasargod

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

M.H.HAMEED AGED 59 YEARS S/O. HASSAINAR, FARZANA HOUSE, MAINADI, ADHUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN SRI.P.V.ANOOP

¶10

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶11

1 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ADHUR POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN 671 543.

¶12

2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR , HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031

¶13

BY SR PP CN PRABHAKARAN

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Dated this the 24th day of January 2020

¶17

 Thisapplication is for pre-arrest bail.

¶18

2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.

¶19

347/2016 of Adhur police station, Kasaragod District

¶20

registered for the offences punishable under Section 3

¶21

read with 25(1-B) of the Arms act, 1959.

¶22

22/07/2016 on getting a reliable information, the Sub

¶23

Inspector of Adhur Police Station conducted search in
the residence of accused No. 1 and detected a pistol

¶24

concealed at his residence. On investigation it was
revealed that this petitioner has concealed the

¶25

pistol at the residence of accused No.1 and thereby he

¶26

has committed the aforesaid offences.

¶27

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has

¶28

submitted that he is a PWD contractor who is engaged

¶29

with many contract works in Kasaragod District and he

¶30

has not committed the offence as alleged.

¶31

5. The learned public prosecutor has submitted that

¶32

the investigation of the case is well in progress.

¶33

6. Considering the nature of the accusation

¶34

levelled against this petitioner and the other facts
and circumstances of the case, I think that custodial
interrogation of this petitioner may not be necessary
to proceed with the investigation of the case which has
started as early as on 22/7/2016. Hence I am inclined

¶35

to grant pre-arrest bail subject to the following
conditions:-

¶36

( i) The petitioner shall be released on bail

¶37

after interrogation on her executing a bond for a sum
of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two

¶38

solvent sureties for the like sum each in the event
of arrest by the police in connection with this
crime.

¶39

interrogation before the investigating officer as and

¶40

when required by him, in writing. He shall co-operate

¶41

with the investigation of the case.

¶42

 (iii) He shall not directly or indirectly, make

¶43

any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court

¶44

or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶45

 (iv) He shall not commit any offence while on

¶46

bail.

¶47

 (v) In case of violation of any of the above

¶48

conditions, the learned Magistrate is empowered to

¶49

cancel the bail in accordance with the law.

SD/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE

VKD

M.H.Hameed v. Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.H.Hameed v. Sub Inspector of Police

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 Faseem K.C. Vs State of Kerala

Manikandan Vs State of Kerala

Gokul Vs State of Kerala

Arun Vs State of Kerala

Manoj Vs the State of Kerala

Jabir Mullali Vs the Intelligence Officer