Allowed

Jamun Jahamgheer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Nov 2020Bail Appl./6678/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kerala HC disposed of an anticipatory bail application. The court held applicants responsible for public property damage due to a Minister's car collision but allowed bail with a directive to surrender within two weeks and conditions to demonstrate contribution to damage repair.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of anticipatory bail application with a direction to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks and produce before Magistrate if arrested, permitting regular bail application

Jamun Jahamgheer 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 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.6678 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.1648/2020 OF Parippally Police Station, Kollam

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 JAMUN JAHAMGHEER AGED 34 YEARS GLOBE HOUSE LAWYER COMPOUND CHINNAKKADA KOLLAM EAST 691001 2 VISHNUPRASAD U AGED 32 YEARS PUTHEN VEEDU, VADAKKEVILA P O VADAKKEVILA, PIN – 691020 AKHIL P KUMAR 3 AGED 25 YEARS MARANGATTU KIZHAKKETHARA NJEKANAL P O KRISHNAPURAM GOKUL B 4 AGED 22 YERS VADAKKEKKARA ASHTAMUDI ASHTAMUDI P O, THRIKKARUVA BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD

¶9

Bail Appl..No.6678 OF 2020

¶10

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

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

¶13

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R1 BY ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION

¶14

SRI.AJITH MURALI PP

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Bail Appl..No.6678 OF 2020

¶17

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Dated this the 5th day of November 2020

¶20

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

¶21

The applicants are accused 1 to 4 in Crime No.1648/2020 of Parippally Police Station, Kollam, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 145, 147, 148 and 353 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3(1)of the PDPP Act.

¶22

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 13.09.2020, the applicants along with other accused had formed an unlawful assembly consisting

¶23

of eight persons and in the prosecution of the common object of the said unlawful assembly to deter the officials facilitating the visit of the Minister of Higher Education, the State of Kerala travelling in a motorcade, the applicants allegedly caused obstruction to the motorcade by

¶24

Bail Appl..No.6678 OF 2020

¶25

¶26

waving black flags in protest at Parippally junction. As a result of the sudden appearance of the applicants and the other accused before the

¶27

motorcade of the Minister, the driver of the Minister’s car had to apply brake abruptly. As a result of which the car coming from behind dashed the rear of the Minister's car, causing damage to the tune of Rs.75,000/- and thus, the applicants

¶28

were instrumental in causing destruction to the public property.

¶29

The applicants state that the allegations

¶30

are not true. They are sympathizers of BJP and were very peacefully conducted a demonstration

¶31

protesting against the Minister. The police officers attempted to remove them by force, which was resisted by them. They are not responsible for causing damage to the Minister's car and they did not contribute anything towards such collusion between the Minister's car and the car following

¶32

Bail Appl..No.6678 OF 2020

¶33

it. It is also stated that the applicants did not deter the public servants from performing their duty and did not also assault them and therefore,

¶34

they may be entitled to pre-arrest bail.

¶35

Heard the learned counsel for the

¶36

applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶37

The learned Public Prosecutor pointed out

¶38

that the applicants have several criminal antecedents and are involved in several crimes. Moreover, they were instrumental in causing damage

¶39

to the public property by suddenly jumping in front of the motorcade carrying the Minister, and therefore, they had committed the offence of destruction to the public property and they also prevented the police officers on duty, assisting the Minister's smooth passage from performing their duties as public servants. Therefore, they

¶40

are not entitled to the pre-arrest bail.

¶41

Having heard the arguments advanced by both

¶42

Bail Appl..No.6678 OF 2020

¶43

¶44

sides, I find that the involvement of the

¶45

applicants in several crimes can not be taken very

¶46

seriously, because all those offences are

¶47

pertaining to political agitations and also for offences coming under the PDPP Act. The applicants are not involved in any offences of grave nature. The fact that the applicants had damaged public

¶48

property is strongly opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the applicants, but it is very clear that it was because the applicants jumped in front of the motorcade that the brakes had to be applied to the car in which the Minister was travelling resulting in the collision with

¶49

that car following it. The applicants are definitely responsible for that at least prima

¶50

facie and therefore, they cannot be exonerated at this moment for being responsible for causing damage to public property. Their actions and the consequences were known to them and therefore, it

¶51

Bail Appl..No.6678 OF 2020

¶52

cannot be held that they are not responsible.

¶53

Under the circumstances, the application for anticipatory bail is disposed of with a direction

¶54

to the applicants to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. In the event of their arrest, and interrogation, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate without any delay and they are at liberty to apply for regular bail before the jurisdictional court, which shall be considered appropriately on deposit of their contribution towards the damage to public property.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

SPK

Jamun Jahamgheer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamun Jahamgheer 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

Sivakumar C. Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Hakeem Vs State of Kerala

Mithul Mohan Vs State of Kerala

Shiji P R Vs State of Kerala

Hrishikradh@ Sagar Vs State of Kerala

Afsal Vs State of Kerala