Allowed

Rinshad, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Feb 2022Bail Appl./285/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, accused of assault and attempting murder under sections of the IPC arising from a mobile phone repair dispute, subject to conditions including bond execution, appearance summons compliance, and non-interference with the investigation or the de facto complainant.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail in Crime No. 2255/2021 subject to conditions including execution of bond with sureties, appearance summons, and non-interference with investigation.

Rinshad, Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 19TH MAGHA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 285 OF 2022

¶5

 Crime No.2255/2021 of Perumbavoor police station

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶7

RINSHAD,
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O.KAREEM, MADAVANA (H), MUDIKKAL, PALLIPRAM KARA,
MARAMBILLY VILLAGE.
BY ADV AJEESH M UMMER

¶8

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶9

STATE OF KERALA,

¶10

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

¶11

ADV T.R. RENJITH -SR.PP

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

BAIL APPL. NO. 285 OF 2022 2

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶16

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.2255/2021 of Perumbavoor police station, alleging commission of offences under Sections 143, 147, 341, 324, 308, r/w. 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

Allegation against the petitioner is that on 07.12.2021, at about 04.15 pm, petitioner along with the other accused wrongfully restrained and assaulted the de facto complainant with an iron rod and a wooden stick, owing to some dispute regarding repairing of a mobile phone. It is alleged that the de facto complainant suffered some injuries owing to the attack.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that the case was fabricated by the de facto complainant owing to the enmity and only with the intention of involving the petitioner/accused in a non-bailable offence. It is submitted that the alleged weapon is a wooden plank which is already been recovered by the police. It is submitted that the petitioner may be granted bail as his custody is not required for the purpose of any

¶19

BAIL APPL. NO. 285 OF 2022 3

¶20

investigation.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor with reference to the wound certificate and the First Information statement of the de facto complainant vehemently opposes the grant of bail. It is submitted that the injury reported near the ear of the de facto complainant is clearly an attempt to do away with the de facto complainant and therefore the offence under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code is attracted. It is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶22

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the nature of the allegations against the petitioner and also taking into account the fact that the entire episode arose out of a dispute regarding repairing of a mobile phone and also considering the fact that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary for the purpose of investigation into the matter, I am of the opinion that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner subject to strict conditions.

¶23

In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in crime No.2255/2021 of Perumbavoor police Station subject to the following conditions:-

¶24

BAIL APPL. NO. 285 OF 2022 4

¶25

(i) Petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶26

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.2255/2021 of Perumbavoor Police station as and when summoned to do so;

¶27

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to contact the de facto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.2255/2021 of Perumbavoor police station;

¶28

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶29

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No. 2255/2021 of Perumbavoor police station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.

sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

ajt

Rinshad, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinshad, 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

Aneesh @ Ramesh .M.P., Vs State of Kerala

P.Gopalakrishnan Alias Dileep Vs State of Kerala

Byju B.R. Vs State of Kerala

Shamsudeen Vs State of Kerala

Gopalakrishnan, Vs State of Kerala

Sooraj V.L. Vs State of Kerala