Kerala High Court
Younas A.K vs State Of Kerala on 15 February, 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 26TH MAGHA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 8599 of 2017
(CRIME NO. 625/2017 OF NADAPURAM POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE)
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO 1 TO 3:
1 YOUNAS A.K.,
AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. MOHAMOOD HAJI,
ANANTHARKANDI HOUSE, NADAPURAM AMSOM, DESAM,
NADAPURAM P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN 673 501.
2 JAFAR,
S/O.POKKAR HAJI, AGED 20 YEARS,
KOYILETTI THAZHAKUNI,
NADAPURAM AMSAM, DESAM
P.O, NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN 673 501.
3 RAHANAS P.T.K.,
S/O. ABOOBAKKAR,AGED 19 YEARS, PATHIYOTTAM THAZHAKUNI,
PURAMERI AMSAM, DESAM, PURAMERI P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN 673 501.
BY ADV.SRI.M.G.SREEJITH
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
NADAPURAM POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.K.B.UDAYAKUMAR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-02-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ss
R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J
----------------------------------------------------
Bail Application No.8599 of 2017
-----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of February, 2018
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in the case registered as Crime No.625 of 2017 of the Nadapuram Police Station under Section 392 I.P.C. The prosecution case is that on 14.11.2017, at about 21.00 hours, while the de facto complainant was walking through a road, the three accused came on a scooter and wrongfully restrained him and hit him on the face. When the de facto complainant fell down, the accused forcibly took from his pocket an amount of Rs.5,000/- and left the place.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
4. The incident alleged had occurred on 14.11.2017. The first information statement to the police is seen given by the de facto complainant only on 23.11.2017. Though the de facto complainant is a person hailing from West Bengal, it appears from the first information statement that he is a person who knows Malayalam very well. What is stated in the first information statement given to the police by the de facto complainant is that the accused threatened him and on account of fear he did not disclose the incident to anybody for a few days. The fact remains that what is robbed by the petitioners is only the money which was kept in the pocket of the de facto complainant. At this distance of time, even if Bail Application No.8599 of 2017 2 custodial interrogation of the accused is made, it is unlikely that the money could be recovered. The prosecution has no case that the petitioners have got any criminal antecedents. In these circumstances, I find that the discretion of the court can be exercised in favour of the petitioners to grant them pre-arrest bail on imposing conditions to ensure free and fair investigation.
In the result, the petition is allowed and it is ordered as follows:
1) The petitioners shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two sureties each for the like amount in the event of their arrest by the police in Crime No. 625 of 2017 of Nadapuram Police Station.
2) Before releasing the petitioners on bail, the investigating officer is entitled to interrogate them.
3) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer between 9 a.m and 11 a.m on all Saturdays for a period of three months from the date of their release on bail.
4) The petitioners shall not influence or intimidate the the de facto complainant or other witnesses in the case.
5) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer as and when directed in writing to do so.
Sd/-
(R. Narayana Pisharadi, Judge) //True Copy// P.A. To Judge ss