Dismissed

Baiju Sukumaran @ Musthafa v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Oct 2020Bail Appl./5602/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in an NDPS offence case, the Court refused the prayer. The applicant was directed to surrender within two weeks or apply for regular bail on arrest after interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail dismissed; applicant directed to surrender within two weeks or apply for regular bail upon arrest after interrogation.

Baiju Sukumaran @ Musthafa 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 15TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.5602 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.08/2020 OF Trivandrum Excise Range Office , Thiruvananthapuram

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

BAIJU SUKUMARAN @ MUSTHAFA AGED 42 YEARS 862, AMARATHIL VEEDU, 12 NALANCHIRA, NALANCHIRA P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695015

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031

¶12

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SRI.SANTHOSH PETER SR PP

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Bail Appl..No.5602 OF 2020 2

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Dated this the 7th day of October 2020

¶19

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

¶20

Applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.08/2020 of Mannanthala Excise Range, Thiruvananthapuram for having allegedly committed offence punishable under Section 20(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

¶21

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the basis of tip-off which was received by the Excise officials, on 19.08.2020 at about 12 noon, the detecting officer and his team reached the residence of the applicant and found a cannabis plant planted in a pot on the open terrace of his residence and thus the crime was registered against him and he has been implicated as a sole accused. Apprehending arrest, he has approached this Court for anticipatory bail.

¶22

Stating that he is totally innocent and that he was having some issues with his neighbour and during his absence, it is possible that his neighbour may have placed the plant in order to foist a false case against him taking advantage of his absence from his residence.

¶23

Bail Appl..No.5602 OF 2020 3

¶24

Considering the fact that it is a crime under the NDPS Act, I am not inclined to grant him anticipatory bail, because that is an extraordinary remedy which can be exercised very sparingly. The applicant is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. In the event of his being arrested, after interrogation, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional court, where he is at liberty to apply for a regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed of

¶25

preferably on the same day taking into consideration the mitigating circumstances pointed out by the counsel for the applicant.

¶26

Sd/- ASHOK MENON

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

rmm

Baiju Sukumaran @ Musthafa v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baiju Sukumaran @ Musthafa 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

M/S. Kairali Aviation Pvt. Ltd., Vs M/S. Cochin International Airport Ltd.

Vipin Kuttappan Vs State of Kerala

Princy John Vs State of Kerala

Asha Murali Vs State of Kerala

Ajmal Khan, Vs State of Kerala

Hijas Vs State of Kerala