Dismissed

Mujeeb v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Jul 2020Bail Appl./2126/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.PC regarding alleged offences under the Wildlife Protection Act, this court denied anticipatory bail. The court held that custodial interrogation was essential to verify the ownership of the seized gun, noting the applicant's lack of cooperation with the investigation. The petition was dismissed, and the applicant was directed to surrender within tw

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail dismissed; applicant directed to surrender within two weeks and pay costs.

Mujeeb Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF JULY 2020 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.2126 OF 2020

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 159/2020 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY

¶7

OR NO.11/2017 OF Kottiyoor Forest Range Office, Kannur

¶8

PETITIONER/A5:

¶9

MUJEEB AGED 40 YEARS S/O.MARAKKAR, NANATH HOUSE, KEEZHPALLI P.O., ARALAM AMSOM DESOM, PUTHIYANGADI, KANNUR DISTRICT,PIN-670 304

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.K.SIJU SMT.S.SEETHA SMT.ANJANA KANNATH

¶11

RESPONDENTS/S:

¶12

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

¶13

2 RANGE FOREST OFFICER KOTTIYOOR FOREST RANGE, KOTTIYOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 651

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN SR PP

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BA 2126/20

O R D E R

BA No.2126 of 2020 [Dated this the 2^nd day of July, 2020]

¶21

This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 Cr.PC.

¶22

Petitioner is the fifth accused in OR No.11/2017 of Kottiyoor Forest Range for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 2, 9, 39, 50 and 51 read with Sections 2(16), 2(20), 2(33), 2(35) and 2(36) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and under Section 27(1)(e)(iv) of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961.

¶23

The prosecution case in brief is that the petitioner along with four others carried a country made gun and killed a Sambar Deer and the meat was transported in an autorickshaw, when the Forest Range Officer intercepted. The petitioner apprehends arrest and hence this application for pre-arrest bail. Three applications for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioner along with the other co-accused were dismissed by the Sessions

¶24

¶25

BA 2126/20

¶26

Court. The fourth time the petitioner alone approached the Sessions Court and filed Criminal MC No.159/2020. That too was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Thalasseri stating that the petitioner has not disclosed the fact regarding filing of the earlier bail applications and consequently, considering the merits of the case, the application was dismissed with a direction to the petitioner to pay costs of Rs.5,000/- to the DLSA, Thalasseri, vide order dated 4.2.2020. Admittedly, that amount has not been paid till now.

¶27

Considering the entirety of the facts and circumstances, it is seen that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much essential for the reason that the gun which has been seized is alleged to be owned by the petitioner. He however disowns it. Hence, unless his custodial interrogation is done, it may not be revealed whether the gun actually belongs to him or to someone else. Under the circumstances, this is not a fit case where the petitioner is entitled to the extraordinary remedy of anticipatory bail. The

¶28

¶29

BA 2126/20

¶30

circumstances also indicate that the petitioner was also not cooperating with the investigation.

¶31

Therefore, the Bail Application is dismissed and the petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks, pay the costs directed to be paid by the Sessions Court, Thalassery and subject himself to interrogation by the investigating officer, and in the event of his being arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional Court before whom the petitioner is at liberty to apply for regular bail. The application for regular bail so filed by the petitioner shall be entertained and disposed of by the Magistrate, on merits, preferably on the very same day itself.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

Mujeeb v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mujeeb 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

Sreesanth T.S. Vs the State of Kerala

Bindhu Vs State of Kerala

Bijina Anna Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Sunny Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Abhuthahir Tv Vs Public Prosecutor

Subramanyan Vs State of Kerala