Allowed

Abhuthahir Tv v. Public Prosecutor

Kerala HC2 Jul 2020Bail Appl./3645/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single accused petitioner sought anticipatory bail for alleged illegal sand transportation under IPC, Kerala Sand Act, and Epidemic Diseases Ordinance. Court found custodial interrogation unnecessary and granted bail with conditions including appearance and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; directed to appear before IO within two weeks; bond conditions imposed.

Abhuthahir Tv Vs Public Prosecutor — 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.3645 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.638/2020 OF Tirur Police Station, Malappuram

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

ABHUTHAHIR T.V., S/O LAILA, AGED 24 YEARS, 9/223, THEKKEVALAPPIL HOUSE, CHAMRAVATTOM, THRIPANGODE, MALAPPURAM – 676102.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.C.ANIL KUMAR

¶10

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶11

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI.AMJAD ALI, SR PP

¶14

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

¶15

B.A.No.3645 of 2020

¶16

-2-

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Dated this the 2nd day of July 2020

¶19

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶20

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.638/2020 of Tirur Police Station for having allegedly committed the offence punishable under Section 379 of the I.P.C., Sections 20 and 23 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and Sections 4(2)(f) and 5 of Kerala Epidemic Diseases Ordinance 2020. The prosecution case in brief is that on 07.06.2020 the petitioner was found transporting river sand illegally in a lorry bearing Reg.No.KL-8Z-6538. He was the driver of the vehicle, but not arrested. The petitioner apprehends arrest and seeks anticipatory bail.

¶21

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶22

The petitioner submits that he does have any other criminal antecedents and he is willing to co-operate with the investigation. The vehicle and the stolen sand have been taken into custody. Therefore, I find that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary and there is nothing to be recovered.

¶23

B.A.No.3645 of 2020

¶24

-3-

¶25

In the result, the application is allowed and the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within two weeks and after interrogation and in the event of his being arrested, he shall be released on bail on execution of self bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, and on the following conditions:

¶26

(i) He shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence;

¶27

(ii) He shall appear before the investigating Officer as and when called for, for the purpose of interrogation; and

¶28

(iii) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in any similar offences.

¶29

In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

Sd/-

dkr

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

Abhuthahir Tv v. Public Prosecutor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhuthahir Tv v. Public Prosecutor

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

Mujeeb Vs State of Kerala

Sunny Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Subramanyan Vs State of Kerala