Allowed

Thasleem v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Dec 2020Bail Appl./5836/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala graced an application for anticipatory bail to five accused charged with offences under the IPC involving unlawful assembly and grievous hurt. The Court allowed the bail, directing surrender within two weeks and imposing conditions regarding witness intimidation and bond security.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicants directed to surrender within two weeks; bail granted upon deposit of Rs.50,000 and bond execution with specific conditions.

Thasleem Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.5836 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.393/2020 OF PAYANGADI POLICE STATION , KANNUR

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1 THASLEEM, AGED 24 YEARS, SON OF NAYEEM, PARAKKAT HOUSE, MATTOOL SOUTH, NEAR OTHEYARKAM BUS STOP, MATTOOL SOUTH KANNUR PIN-670302

¶9

2 ASHIK, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.MAJEED, M.P.HOUSE, MEETHALE PURAYIL, MATTOOL SOUTH.

¶10

3 HAMZA, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM KUTTY , PIN-670302

¶11

4 NAYEEM, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL NASER, THEME THAIVALAPIL HOUSE, MATTOOL SOUTH, KANNUR. PIN-670302

¶12

5 SHAHABAS, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KHEDER, KAKKANDI HOUSE, MATTOOL SOUTH, KANNUR. PIN-670230

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.E.A.HARIS

¶14

B.A.No.5836 OF 2020

¶15

¶16

RESPONDENT:

¶17

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN-682031

¶18

OTHER PRESENT:

¶19

SRI.AJITH MURALI-PP

¶20

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

B.A.No.5836 OF 2020

¶22

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Dated this the 03rd day of December, 2020

¶25

APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

¶26

The applicants are accused Nos. 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10 in Crime No.393 of 2020 of Payangadi Police Station, Kannur, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the IPC. Subsequently, offence under Section 326 IPC has also been incorporated. The prosecution case, in brief, is this:

¶27

The applicants, along with the other co-accused, on 19.07.2020, formed an unlawful assembly at about 6.50 AM and owing to the previous enmity with the defacto complainant, in prosecution of the common object of the said unlawful assembly, they caused grievous hurt to the defacto complainant, by means of dangerous weapons like iron rods. It was accused Nos. 1 to 4 who were wielding the iron rods. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 have been already released on regular bail after they were arrested. The recovery of the weapons allegedly used by accused Nos. 1 to 3 has been completed. The

¶28

B.A.No.5836 OF 2020

¶29

¶30

applicants state that they have no criminal antecedents. And, therefore, they may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor has admitted that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. But, it is stated that the 4^th accused, is also a person who was wielding a weapon like an iron rod, which is yet to be recovered and the grievous injury has been caused to the injured. Under the circumstances, the bail application is vehemently opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶32

After having considered the submissions made on both sides, I find that the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. The weapons used by accused Nos. 1 to 3 have already been recovered and they have been granted regular bail. Custodial interrogation of the applicants may not be necessary. They are willing to co-operate with the investigation.

¶33

In the result, the application is allowed and the applicants are directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within two weeks. In the event of their being arrested,

¶34

B.A.No.5836 OF 2020

¶35

¶36

after interrogation and recovery, if any, they shall be released on bail on the execution of bonds for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only), each with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and on following further conditions:

¶37

(i) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

¶38

(ii) They shall not intimidate or influence witnesses and tamper with evidence.

¶39

(iii) They shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail period.

¶40

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

¶41

The bail application is allowed.

¶42

Sd/ASHOK MENON JUDGE

¶43

NR/03/12/20

Thasleem v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thasleem 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

Raju Antony Vs State of Kerala

Sabu Vs State of Kerala

Sabu Vs State of Kerala

Chris Sebastian Vs State of Kerala

Jaaz Nalil Pothen Vs State of Kerala

Shibu Vs State of Kerala