Allowed

Sayid Abuthahir v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jan 2022Bail Appl./33/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the 5th accused, who was arrested for serious offences including kidnapping and armed robbery related to a property dispute. Strict conditions regarding surrender, appearance, and non-interference were imposed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and specific conditions regarding appearance and non-interference.

Sayid Abuthahir Vs the State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 1ST MAGHA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 33 OF 2022

¶6

CRIME NO.563/2021 OF Nattukal Police Station, Palakkad
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 2746/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

¶7

CLASS , MANNARKAD

¶8

PETITIONER/5th ACCUSED:

¶9

SAYID ABUTHAHIR
AGED 21 YEARS
S/O. ABU SALAM, KANNAPPALLI HOUSE, MUTHUKKUMPURM,
THAZHEKODE P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 679 357
BY ADVS.
P.SAMSUDIN
LIRA A.B.

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031
(IN CRIME NO. 563/2021 OF NATTUKAL POLICE STATION IN
PALAKKAD DISTRICT)
BY ADV ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION
SRI. M.C. ASHI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

BAIL APPL. NO. 33 OF 2022 2

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This is an application for regular bail.

¶16

Petitioner is the 5^th accused in Crime No.563/2021 of Nattukal police station, Palakkad district, alleging commission of offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 323, 324, 307, 392 and 363 r/w.section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

Allegation against the petitioner is that, he along with other accused in the case, trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant, attacked him and forcefully took away a sum of Rs.7,30,000/- and a cheque from him and also wrongfully restrained him and kidnapped him in a car. It is alleged that the de facto complainant, somehow, managed to escape from the clutches of the petitioner and the other accused and filed the complaint which led to registration of the above crime.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to documents produced as Annexures A2, A3, and A4 would contend that the 1^st accused had leased out a chicken farm from the de facto complainant and the failure of the de facto complainant to return the amounts paid by the 1^st accused as

¶19

BAIL APPL. NO. 33 OF 2022 3

¶20

security deposit led to some disputes between them. It is submitted that the petitioners had gone to the house of the de facto complainant only after the de facto complainant had promised to return the amounts payable to the 1^st accused. It is submitted that in Annexure-A2 agreement there is a promise to return the amounts to the 1^st accused in the case. It is submitted that there are also proceedings initiated by the mother of the 1^st accused and the 3^rd accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, against the de facto complainant. It is submitted that petitioner/5th accused is absolutely innocent in the matter and that further custody of the petitioner is not necessary as the petitioner has been in custody for 30 days, having been arrested on 20.12.2021.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor refers to the statement given by the de facto complainant and refers to the wound certificate issued in respect of him and points out that the allegations against the petitioner are serious. It is submitted that there is one serious injury in so far as the de facto complainant is concerned and there is also an allegation that he was kidnapped. It is submitted that the investigation in the matter is progressing and that the grant of bail, at this stage,

¶22

BAIL APPL. NO. 33 OF 2022 4

¶23

will affect the progress of investigation.

¶24

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioner has been in custody from 20.12.2021, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be released on bail subject to strict conditions. Accordingly, this application for bail is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:-

¶25

(i) The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

¶26

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No. 563/2021 of Nattukal Police station on every Saturday at 11 am until further orders;

¶27

(iii) The petitioners shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate the de facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.. 563/2021 of Nattukal police station;

¶28

(iv) The petitioner shall not enter the local limits of the Nattukal police station where the de facto complainant is

¶29

BAIL APPL. NO. 33 OF 2022 5

¶30

residing except for the purpose of complying with condition No.(ii) above;

¶31

(v) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional court. If the petitioner does not have a passport, he shall execute an affidavit to that effect and file the same before the said court within seven days of release on bail;

¶32

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

¶33

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.563/2021 of Nattukal police station may file an application before the jurisdictional court, for cancellation of bail.

SD/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

ajt

Sayid Abuthahir v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayid Abuthahir v. the 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

Noushad A.K. Vs State of Kerala

Syed Ali Vs State of Kerala

Shaji, Vs State of Kerala

Xxx Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs State of Kerala

Pregmesh. M. P Vs State of Kerala