Allowed

Nasif Binshad, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Feb 2024Bail Appl./390/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail filed by an accused in a matrimonial dispute involving allegations of dowry harassment and cruelty under Section 498A IPC. The judgment notes the short duration of the marriage and the nature of allegations.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed with conditions: surrender for interrogation; release on bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties; prohibition on influencing the complainant or witnesses;

Nasif Binshad, Vs State of Kerala — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 16TH MAGHA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 390 OF 2024

¶6

CRIME NO.49/2024 OF AYIROOR POLICE STATION, Thiruvananthapuram PETITIONER/ACCUSED :

¶7

1NASIF BINSHAD,
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O.NOUSHAD, HAJRAS, MANTHARA, EDAVA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695311

¶8

2NOUSHAD,
AGED 65 YEARS
S/O.MOHAMMAD YOUSAF, HAJRAS, MANTHARA, EDAVA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695311
3SABITHA,
AGED 55 YEARS
W/O.NOUSHAD, HAJRAS, MANTHARA, EDAVA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695311
BY ADV M.DINESH

¶9

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶10

STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
HIGH COURT P.O.,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

SR.PP-SRI.RENJIT GEORGE

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

BA No.390 of 2024

O R D E R

This is an application for anticipatory bail under

¶18

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.49 of 2024 of Ayiroor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, registered under Sections 498(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The prosecution allegation is that, the petitioners, who are the husband and in-laws of the defacto complainant, subjected her to matrimonial cruelties demanding more money and dowry.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail

¶22

application.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, the marriage between the first petitioner and the defacto complainant was solemnized on 17.07.2022 and

¶24

BA No.390 of 2024

¶25

¶26

they lived together just for one year, and they never subjected her to any kind of harassment demanding dowry.

¶27

Since this being a matrimonial dispute, chances of settlement, if any, could be foreclosed forever, if the petitioners are sent to jail. Considering that aspect and also considering the fact that no physical assault is alleged, except the general allegations of harassment demanding dowry, this Court is inclined to release them on anticipatory bail.

¶28

In the result, the bail application is allowed on the following terms;

¶29

(i) The first petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 16.02.2024, and subject himself for interrogation. In the event of arrest, he shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

¶30

(ii) In the event of arrest of petitioners 2 and 3, they shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) by each of them,

¶31

BA No.390 of 2024

¶32

¶33

with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

¶34

(iii) The petitioners shall not influence or

¶35

intimidate the defacto complainant or other witnesses, or tamper with the investigation.

¶36

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

¶37

(v) In case of violation of any of these conditions,

¶38

the investigating officer can approach the jurisdictional Magistrate to get their bail cancelled, in accordance with law.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE

¶41

rkj

Nasif Binshad, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasif Binshad, 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

Visakh C.R., Vs State of Kerala

Sushama Mavila, Vs State of Kerala

Alvin Raj S.M., Vs State of Kerala

Riyas B., Vs State of Kerala

Sainudheen.v.v., Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Saleel K.P., Vs State of Kerala