Allowed

Habeeb v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Dec 2021CRL.A/914/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a criminal appeal challenging the forfeiture of a surety bond. The court reduced the penalty from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 5,000 and granted remission for Rs. 20,000, citing parity with a related case and the surrender of the primary accused. Failure to deposit the reduced amount within a month may lead to civil imprisonment.

What did the court decide?

Penalty modified to Rs. 5,000; remission granted for Rs. 20,000; appeal allowed to that extent.

Habeeb Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

CRL.A NO. 914 OF 2021

¶6

M.C. NO. 20/2019 IN SC 366/2018 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT - II,

¶7

NORTH PARAVUR

¶8

APPELLANT/COUNTER PETITIONER NO. 1:

¶9

HABEEB S/O. ABUBECKER, EDASSERY HOUSE, 688/18, CHOORNIKKARA, NOW RESIDING AT KUNNATH, THAIKKATUKARA P.O, ALUVA WEST, ALUVA - 683106.

¶10

BY ADV. FRANKLIN ARACKAL

¶11

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682031.

¶13

BY SRI.RENJITH T.R., SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.A.No.914 OF 2021 2

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

This is an appeal preferred under Section 449(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the correctness of the order of the Additional Sessions Judge – II, North Paravur in M.C. No. 20/2019 in S.C. No. 366/2018. The appellant is the first surety of the first accused in that case. The impugned order suggests that during the course of trial, the first accused went absconding and thereafter sureties could not produce him before Court. Thus the bond was forfeited and the sureties were served with show cause notice as to why the bond amount shall not be realised from them. Even though notice was served on them, they did not respond and thus the entire amount of Rs. 25,000/-was slapped on them as penalty. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant has moved this Court in this appeal.

¶18

I heard the learned counsel for the appellant and

¶19

also the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶20

According to the learned counsel, the first accused

¶21

has already surrendered before Court and now he is in judicial

¶22

Crl.A.No.914 OF 2021 3

¶23

custody. Referring to the judgment of this Court in Crl.A.No. 812/2020 dated 15.07.2021 he pointed out that the appeal

¶24

preferred by counter petitioner No. 2 in the Miscellaneous case has been partly allowed.

¶25

According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant has become physically handicapped since he had

¶26

suffered injuries in a motor accident and his movements are restricted.

¶27

After hearing the learned counsel on both sides and

¶28

also taking into account the fact that his co-surety was granted a remission and that appeal was allowed in part granting her remission and reducing the penalty to Rs. 5,000/-, this appeal can also be allowed to that extent.

¶29

Even though, order under appeal was passed after affording opportunity to show cause why the bond amount shall not be imposed as penalty, that opportunity was not availed by him.

¶30

Anyhow, considering the fact that the first accused

¶31

has already surrendered before the Court, it seems that the

¶32

Crl.A.No.914 OF 2021 4

¶33

appellant can be granted remission. For parity of reasons with the judgment in Crl.A.No. 812/2020, the penalty imposed on him is modified to Rs. 5,000/-, granting remission to the extent of Rs. 20,000/-. Crl. Appeal is allowed to that extent. If the amount is not deposited within a period of one month from today, the appellant will have to be sent to civil prison for two weeks or his property shall be liable to be proceeded against.

¶34

The Crl. Appeal is allowed as above.

SD/-

K.HARIPAL

JUDGE

DCS/16.12.2021

Habeeb v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Habeeb 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

Rev.Dr.P.E.Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Lissy Shaju Vs State of Kerala

Sri.Santiago Rickson Vs State of Kerala

Satheesh Vs State of Kerala

Jijeesh Vs State of Kerala

Sathyaraj Vs State of Kerala