Dismissed

Jasim Malik v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jun 2021Bail Appl./3014/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 438 CrPC for robbery (Section 395 IPC), the petitioner claimed innocence and false implication. The court found it not a fit case for bail due to ongoing investigation and ordered the petitioner to surrender within ten days.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; petitioner directed to surrender to Investigating Officer within ten days, subject to arrest once materials are found.

Jasim Malik Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 31ST JYAISHTA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 3014 OF 2021

¶6

Crime No.121 of 2021 of Mattannur Police Station

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

JASIM MALIK AGED 29 YEARS CRESCENT,CHENOLI.P.O NOCHAD.KOZHIKODE KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673525

¶9

BY ADV M.BAIJU NOEL

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

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

¶12

BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

PP - SMT. SREEJA V.

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

BAIL APPL. NO. 3014 OF 2021

¶17

-2-

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This is an application filed under

¶20

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, moved by one of the accused in Crime No.121/2021 of Mattannur Police Station. The crime was registered on 19.02.2021 alleging the offence under Section 395 IPC. The alleged incident had happened at 4.20 a.m. on 13.02.2021.

¶21

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is totally innocent in the crime, he has been falsely implicated, that the subject matter of robbery being one kg of gold had no proper assignment and that there are mysterious aspects to be resolved by the prosecution

¶22

BAIL APPL. NO. 3014 OF 2021

¶23

-3-

¶24

and that the police is after him without any basis and therefore, he seeks for pre-arrest bail.

¶25

3. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, investigation of the case is in progress, even though the rank of the petitioner cannot be ascertained

¶26

now, ten accused including the petitioner had involved in the commission of the crime that the role of the petitioner is very much patent and his custodial interrogation is necessary for unravelling the mystery.

¶27

4. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, I am not convinced that this

¶28

is a fit case for granting anticipatory

¶29

BAIL APPL. NO. 3014 OF 2021

¶30

-4-

¶31

bail. The petitioner is at liberty to surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today. On surrendering, if there are materials to suggest his involvement in the crime, his arrest shall be effected at the earliest and he shall be produced before Court without loss of time.

¶32

With this observation, the petition is

¶33

disposed of.

¶34

sd/K. HARIPAL, JUDGE

¶35

STK

Jasim Malik v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jasim Malik 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

N.a.Sasidharan Vs Ragesh

Jayakumar K.J. Vs George Thomas

Karuppuswami, Vs State of Kerala

Shibin N Jose Vs State of Kerala

Riyas Vs State of Kerala

Kp Sajith Vs State of Kerala