Kerala High Court
Majeed vs State Of Kerala on 9 May, 2017
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MAY 2017/19TH VAISAKHA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 2749 of 2017 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 385/2017 OF PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 7 AND 9:
--------------------------------------
1. MAJEED,
AGED 44, S/O. KUNHAMMAD,
KUNNUMMAL, P.O. CHENOLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
2. YUSAF,
AGED 39, S/O.KUNHAMMAD,
KUNNUMAL, P.O. CHENOLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
3. SIRAJ,
AGED 35, S/O. KUNHAMMAD,
KUNNUMMAL, P.O. CHENOLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
4. KUNHAMMAD,
AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. CHOKRAN,
KUNNUMMAL, P.O. CHENOLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
5. AHAMMAD,
AGED 40, S/O. ALIKKUTTY,
KUNDUGAL, P.O. CHENOLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
6. ISMAIL,
AGED 30, S/O. IBRAHIM,
MALAYIL, NACHAD P.O.,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
7. MUNEER,
AGED 25, S/O. IBRAHIM,
MALAYIL, NACHAD P.O.,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
8. T.P. NASAR,
S/O. KUNHAMMAD, AGED 44,
CRECSENT HOUSE,
VALOOR, P.O.CHENOLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI
SRI.S.RAJEEV
SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
SRI.V.VINAY
Bail Appl..No. 2749 of 2017 ()
------------------------------
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT.:
---------------------------
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN- 682031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.K. PRASAD
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
EL
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J
-----------------------------------
B.A. No.2749 of 2017
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of May, 2017
ORDER
1.This is an application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos.1 to 7 in Crime No.385 of 2017 of Perambra Police Station. In the aforesaid case, they have alleged to have committed offence punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 308 read with 149 of the IPC.
3.The prosecution allegation is that on 8.4.2017, the petitioners herein formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their common object wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and assaulted him with deadly weapons causing injuries.
4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. B.A.2749/2017 2
5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are innocent.
6.The learned Public Prosecutor would oppose the submission and submit that serious injuries were sustained by the de facto complainant which had culminated in lacerated wound on the scalp.
7.In so far as accused Nos.1 to 3, 5 to 7 and 9 are concerned, I am not inclined to exercise my discretion and grant them pre-arrest bail. They are directed to surrender before the learned Magistrate on 22.5.2017 between 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. If an application for bail is preferred before the learned Magistrate the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed expeditiously.
8.I take note of the fact that the 4th petitioner is the father of accused Nos.1 to 3 and he is aged 70 years. Considering his advanced age, I am of the opinion that relief can be granted to him subject to the following B.A.2749/2017 3 conditions.
(i) It is directed that in the event of the arrest of the 4th petitioner/4th accused in connection with the Crime No.385 of 2017 of Perambra Police Station, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer effecting the arrest.
(ii) The 4th petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
(iii) The 4th petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required by the Investigating officer and for all investigative purposes whenever required.
(iv) The 4th petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.
(v) The 4th petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate.
(vi) If he surrenders before the Magistrate, this order shall not be applicable and the learned B.A.2749/2017 4 Magistrate may pass appropriate orders.
(vii) In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the concerned court on being noticed of that fact will be empowered to cancel the bail.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE vps