Allowed

Kabeer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Dec 2020Bail Appl./6704/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Kabeer accused of extortion and intimidation under Sections 384 and 506 IPC. The court found custodial interrogation unnecessary without documentary evidence of the alleged payment and directed surrender within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; directed to surrender within two weeks; bail on production of bond of Rs. 1 lakh with two solvent sureties for like amount.

Kabeer 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

MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.6704 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.1023/2020 OF ALAPPUZHA NORTH POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

KABEER, AGED 53 YEARS, EDATHIL HOUSE, VAZHICHERI, ALAPPUZHA HEAD POST OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PIN-688001

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.SAIJO HASSAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN-682031 2 ADDL. R2 SHRI. UNAISE, AGED 42 YEARS, BHUSHARA MANZIL, KARUKAYIL WARD, PIN - 688006 IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL R2 AS PER ORDER DATED 14/12/2020 IN CRL MA 3/2020

¶12

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R2 BY ADV. S.SANAL KUMAR R2 BY ADV. SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN R2 BY ADV. SMT.T.J.SEEMA OTHERS PRESENT:

¶13

SRI.AJITH MURALI-PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

B.A.No.6704 OF 2020

¶16

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Dated this the 14th day of December, 2020

¶19

APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

¶20

The applicant is the accused in Crime No.1023 of
2020 of Alappuzha North Police Station, for having allegedly
committed offences punishable under Sections 384 and 506 of
the IPC. The prosecution case, in brief, is this:

¶21

2.The applicant with the intention to extort money from
the defacto complainant, who is a businessman running a
jewellery, threatened him that he would report to the Income Tax
authorities to conduct a raid in his jewellery and consequent to
10.07.2019, the defacto complainant gave Rs.1 lakh to the
applicant to avoid the Income tax authorities conducting a raid in
his shop. However, the applicant did not stop at there. He kept
on intimidating him and demanded Rs. 9 lakhs more. The
applicant states that the allegations are not true and that he is a
businessman dealing with real estate business and that the
applicant and the defacto complainant know each other for

¶22

B.A.No.6704 OF 2020

¶23

¶24

several years. Nine months ago, the applicant had gave
information to the defacto complainant that the owner of the plot
adjacent to his jewellery is looking for a purchaser. Thereafter,
the defacto complainant directly approached the owner of the
property and purchase the property without involving the
applicant and this irked the applicant and he requested the
defacto complainant to pay him commission in the same.
Because, he is the person who intimated him regarding the
availability of the plot. It is because of this reason, that a false
complaint has been filed against the applicant before the Police
in consequent of which, Crime No.1023 of 2020 has been
registered at the Alappuzha North Police Station.

¶25

3.The applicant has produced the FIR in this crime
which indicates that the allegation of extortion was on
10.07.2019. There is absolutely no material regarding payment
of Rs.1 lakh to the applicant. The FIR is registered only on
8.10.2020. That is more than an year and 3 months later. The
delay is not satisfactorily explained. The applicant has been
constantly harassed by the businessman there and in
consequence of that, several cases has been registered against
him. He has been granted anticipatory bail in most of the cases.

¶26

B.A.No.6704 OF 2020

¶27

¶28

This is one of the last cases in which he is seeking anticipatory
bail. The applicant submits that he is willing to co-operate with
the investigation and therefore, be granted pre-arrest bail.

¶29

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant

¶30

and also the learned counsel appearing for the defacto
complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶31

5.The learned counsel appearing for the defacto
complainant submits that the Vyapari Vyavasayi committee had
filed a complaint against the applicant before the higher
authorities regarding his extortion and illegal activities. This
incident took place in the month of July 2020. The incident
pertained to this instant case took place on 10.07.2019. There is
absolutely no documents produced by the defacto complainant
evidencing payment of Rs.1 lakh in consequent to the alleged
extortion. Under the circumstances, I find that custodial
interrogation of the applicant may not be necessary.

¶32

6.In the result, the application is allowed and the
applicant is directed to surrender before the Investigating
Officer withing two weeks and in the event of his being arrested,

¶33

he shall be released on bail on the execution of a bond for
Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One lakh only), with two solvent sureties,

¶34

B.A.No.6704 OF 2020

¶35

¶36

each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating
Officer and on following further conditions:

¶37

(i)He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as
and when called for and shall co-operate with the investigation.

¶38

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

¶39

(iii)He 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/14/12/20

Kabeer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kabeer 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

Jacob Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Nazeer Vs State of Kerala

Sarath N.S Vs State of Kerala

Manu Vs State of Kerala

K.M. Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Gopan.M.G Vs State of Kerala