Allowed

Mohammed Shafeeq, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Sept 2021Bail Appl./6165/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application in a crime under the Excise Act concerning Indian Made Foreign Liquor was allowed. The High Court released the accused on bail after considering their lack of criminal antecedents and extended period of detention, subject to furnishing sureties and adhering to standard aerial maintenance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each, appearing before the investigating officer on alternate Saturdays for two months, and not tampering with evidence or

Mohammed Shafeeq, Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

BAIL APPL. NO. 6165 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 9^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 18TH BHADRA, 1943

¶7

BAIL APPL. NO. 6165 OF 2021

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 849/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,KASARAGOD, KASARGOD

¶9

(CRIME NO.174 OF 2021 OF KASARAGOD EXCISE RANGE, KASARAGOD)

¶10

PETITIONERS

¶11

1 MOHAMMED SHAFEEQ, AGED 26 YEARS SON OF ABDUL KHADER, RESIDING AT KUTTIAN VALAPP VEEDU, BEACH ROAD, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK.

¶12

2 K.N. BALAKRISHNA HOLLA, AGED 45 YEARS S/O. NARAYANA HOLLA, R/AT SREE BALAJI VEEDU, BEACH ROAD, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK.

¶13

BY ADV A.ARUNKUMAR

¶14

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT AND STATE

¶15

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

SRI MANU.P.G- SR.P.P

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

BAIL APPL. NO. 6165 OF 2021

¶20

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶23

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No. 174 of 2021 of Kasaragod Excise Range registered for the offences punishable under Section 58 of Abkari Act.

¶24

They have been in custody since 02.08.2021.

¶25

The allegation is that on 02.08.2021 at about 9.15 p.m the petitioners were found in possession of 198.72 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor concealed in a Mahindra Xylo car bearing Reg.No. KL 14 Z 3702 and proceeding through the public road lying near Madona School, Kasaragod, which is meant for sale in Karnataka State, in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari Act. They were apprehended by the excise officials and thus they were booked for the said charge.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that they have no connection with the alleged seizure of contraband by the excise officials. They were falsely implicated in the case and they are undergoing unnecessary incarceration for the last more than one month.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application

¶29

BAIL APPL. NO. 6165 OF 2021

¶30

¶31

contending that the investigation of the case is only in progress.

¶32

Though the investigation of the case is not over, considering the

¶33

period of detention undergone by them in judicial custody and the fact that they have no criminal antecedents, I am inclined to release them on bail subject to the following conditions.

¶34

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on each of them executing bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

¶35

(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer on alternate Saturdays of every month for for a period of two months or till filing of the final report.

¶36

(iii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶37

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶38

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned

¶39

Magistrate/Judge is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance

with the law.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V. JUDGE

smm

Mohammed Shafeeq, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Shafeeq, 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

Anshif, Vs the State of Kerala

Nandakumar Vs State of Kerala

Shan Vs State of Kerala

Arun Raj Vs State of Kerala

Ankith a, Vs Excise Inspector

Sajikuttan Vs State of Kerala