Allowed

Shahid v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Feb 2021Bail Appl./603/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order passes regular bail to an accused aged 19 involved in a riot resulting in an attempted murder. The High Court allowed the application after finding that investigation was complete and recovery concluded, deeming further detention unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail allowed; petitioner directed to be released on bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties on specified conditions.

Shahid 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 ASHOK MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 15TH MAGHA,1942 Bail Appl..No.603 OF 2021

¶5

CRIME NO.901/2020 OF Mannuthy Police Station , Thrissur

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SHAHID AGED 19 YEARS S/O. SHAJI, KANJIRAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KURA-PULIPARAMBU DESOM, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 680662 BY ADV. SRI.VISHNUPRASAD NAIR

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031 R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶10

OTHER PRESENT:

¶11

SRI.SANTHOSH PETER-SRPP

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

Bail Appl..No.603 OF 2021 2

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

Dated this the 4th day of February 2021 Application for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶16

The applicant is 1st accused in Crime No.901/2020 of Mannuthy Police Station for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326 and 307 r/w section 149 of IPC.

¶17

The prosecution case, in brief, is that one Ameer the friend of the de facto complainant had posted an obscene picture of the 2nd accused's relative which led to confrontation between the accused, and the aforesaid Ameer and the de facto complainant. The applicant along with other accused in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly of which they were all members, committed riot armed with deadly weapons like knife and wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and the applicant allegedly stabbed him on the back with a knife causing grievous hurt to the de facto complainant which could have proved fatal and thus the applicant and other accused attempted to commit murder.

¶18

The applicant states that he is innocent and the

¶19

Bail Appl..No.603 OF 2021 3

¶20

allegations are not true and that the injury sustained is not life threatening. There was a scuffle in which certain persons were injured. The applicant is willing to abide by any conditions. The investigation is over. Recovery is also completed and therefore further detention of the applicant may not be necessary.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶22

The learned Public Prosecutor points out that the applicant is a notorious criminal having five other criminal cases registered against him. Considering his antecedents, the application for bail is opposed. It is also pointed out that the injury sustained by the injured was quite serious and it could have penetrated his lungs. Under the circumstances, it is prayed that the application for bail may be rejected. It is admitted that the final report has already been filed.

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that out of the five cases registered against the applicant, one was registered when he was juvenile and there are only two cases for offences under Section 326 and all other cases are for minor offences. The applicant is willing to abide by any conditions. He is only 19 years old and therefore seeks bail.

¶24

Bail Appl..No.603 OF 2021 4

¶25

After having heard the submissions made on both sides, I find that since recovery is completed and the investigation is already over, further incarceration of the applicant may not serve any purpose, particularly during these pandemic times. Hence the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.50,000/(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on following conditions:-

¶26

(i) He shall not get involved in similar cases during the currency of the bail.

¶27

(ii) He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for.

¶28

(iii) He shall not tamper with evidence, intimidate or influence the witnesses .

¶29

In case of violation of the bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

¶30

ASHOK MENON

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

rmm

Shahid v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahid 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

Shyju Vs State of Kerala

Sreedas Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Raoof Vs State of Kerala

Saheer Alias Sha Paraichakam Vs State of Kerala

Shiju.U Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu.B.C Handran Vs State of Kerala