Abdul Kadir Ameer vs State Of Kerala on 14 July, 2014

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Abdul Kadir Ameer vs State Of Kerala on 14 July, 2014

Bench: Thomas P.Joseph

       

  

  

 
 
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                                      PRESENT:

                       THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

                  MONDAY,THE 14TH DAY OF JULY 2014/23RD ASHADHA, 1936

                                        Bail Appl..No. 5111 of 2014 (D)
                                        ------------------------------------------
          [CRIME NUMBER NOT KNOWN OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION,
            PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT]
                                                    .............


PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
----------------------------------

            ABDUL KADIR AMEER, AGED 51 YEARS,
            S/O.ABDUL KADIR, FATHIMA MANZIL, LAHAM PURAYIDOM,
            CHITTOOR MURI, PATHANAMTHITTA.


            BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.


RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:
--------------------------------------------------------

        1. STATE OF KERALA,
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
            ERNAKULAM-682 031 (THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
            PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION,
            PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT).

        2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
            PATHANAMTHITTA-689 647.


            BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA.


            THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
            ON 14-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
            FOLLOWING:




Prv.



                      THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J
                   ======================
                        B.A No.5111of 2014
                   ======================
                Dated this the 14th day of July, 2014

                             ORDER

Petitioner apprehends arrest by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pathanamthitta and has filed this application.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as per report received from the said officer, no case is registered against the petitioner. A complaint is received from one Anzar for and on behalf of Ratheesh Kumar. It relates to some other transactions and involves cheating.

3. Learned Counsel submits that the allegations are not true.

4. In the light of submissions made by the Public Prosecutor, the petitioner cannot have apprehension of arrest now. B.A No.5111/2014 2

Petition is disposed of with the direction that in case interrogation of the petitioner is required on the complaint aforesaid, notice under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall be served on the petitioner. Thereon, it is open to the petitioner to seek appropriate relief.

Sd/-

                                       THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE

vdv                     //True Copy//       P.Ato Judge

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court