Allowed

Badaruheen Kainikkara v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Mar 2021Bail Appl./913/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an order granting anticipatory bail to an accused allegedly involved in abduction, forgery, and robbery who was at large since 2019. The High Court allowed the application subject to surrender within two weeks and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The bail application is allowed; applicant directed to surrender within two weeks; release on bail upon arrest subject to bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and conditions.

Badaruheen Kainikkara Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.913 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.477/2019 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

BADARUHEEN KAINIKKARA, AGED 42 YEARS, KAINIKKARA HOUSE, PARIYARATHUKUNNU, TIRUR P.O., MALAPPURAM PIN-676105

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

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

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI.SANTHOSH PETER – SR.PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

B.A.No.913 OF 2021

¶16

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Dated this the 18th day of March, 2021

¶19

APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

¶20

The applicant is an accused in Crime No.477 of 2019 of Perinthalmanna Police Station, Malappuram, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 364, 465 and 395 of the IPC. The prosecution case, in brief, is this:

¶21

On 12.07.2019, the applicant, along with 11 others, allegedly trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and abducted his son in a vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-10F-4848, which was driven by the applicant herein and thereafter he was made to sign certain documents. His computer, mobile phone, pen drive etc., were stolen. The mother of the victim filed a complaint before the Perinthalamanna Police Station and the crime was registered. Thereafter, it is understood that the victim was found murdered in Dehradun. In connection with that another crime is registered by the Dehradun Police and 10 persons connected with that crime were also arrested. The investigation is going on. Certain persons were arrested in this

¶22

B.A.No.913 OF 2021

¶23

¶24

crime. But, the applicant has not yet been arrested. Incident took place on 12.07.2019. It is stated that he was available. But, his custody was not found to be essential. And, therefore, he was not arrested. Several other persons were arrested and already released on bail. The applicant states that he has no other criminal antecedents. He is willing to co-operate with the investigation. He is only a driver and his aged parents are depending on him. And, therefore, he may be granted pre-arrest bail.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor admits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The fact whether the applicant was only a driver or that he was actually involved in the act of abduction and robbery is a matter of evidence to be considered by the trial court on the basis of the evidence that may be adduced. It is true that the rest of the accused have been released on bail after they were incarcerated for some time. The applicant is willing to co-operate with the investigation and I find that custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be necessary because the Police have not attended to arrest him since 2019.

¶26

B.A.No.913 OF 2021

¶27

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within two weeks. In the event of his arrest, after interrogation, 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, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and on following further conditions:

¶29

(i) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

¶30

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

¶31

(iii) He shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail period.

¶32

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.

¶33

The bail application is allowed.

¶34

Sd/ASHOK MENON JUDGE

¶35

NR/18/03/2021

Badaruheen Kainikkara v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badaruheen Kainikkara 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhash Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Noushad. K Vs State of Kerala

Purushothaman V.S Vs State of Kerala

Jamshad K P Vs State of Kerala

Ajith Babu Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Salim M Vs State of Kerala