ANEESH MUHAMMED v. STATE OF KERALA
Court: High Court of Kerala
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Kerala judgment dated 2020-12-03. ANEESH MUHAMMED v. STATE OF KERALA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON THURSDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942 Bail Appl.. No. 7827 OF 2020 CRIME NO. 1439/2020 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: 1 ANEESH MUHAMMED AGED 36 YEARS KONJANATH HOUSE, PERUMBILAVU DESOM, P. O. PERUMBILAVU VILLAGE, KUNNAMKULAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 680519 2 ASHARAF. M. A AGED 42 YEARS MANALATH HOUSE,PERUMBILAVU DESAM ,PERUMBILAVU. PO 680519 3 VAHAB AGED 38 YEARS MANALATH HOUSE, PERUMBILAVU DESOM, P. O. PERUMBILAVU VILLAGE, KUNNAMKULAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 680519 4 BINU AGED 42 YEARS PILAKKAL HOUSE,PERUMBILAVU VILLAGE AND DESAM 680519 BY ADVS. SRI. M. ANIL KUMAR SMT. PREETHI K. PURUSHOTHAMAN RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SRI. B. JAYASURYA SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03. 12.
2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BA 7827/2020 2 O R D E R Dated this the 3rd day of December 2020 This is an application seeking anticipatory bail. 2. The applicants are accused 1 to 4 in Crime No. 1439/2020 Kunnamkulam Police Station for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 308 read with Section 34 of Indian penal code. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 4-10-2020 at about 8. 30 pm at Anakallu, while the defacto complainant was riding a motor cycle, the applicants wrongfully restrained him and thereafter attacked him with an iron pipe causing some injuries to him and attempted to commit culpable BA 7827/2020 3 homicide. 4. The applicants state that the allegations are not true and that they have been falsely implicated by the de facto complainant, who had earlier attacked the mother of the second and third applicants and in order to escape from that case, a false case has been foisted against the applicants.
It is also submitted that the de facto complainant has other criminal antecedents, while the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. Hence, they seek anticipatory bail. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor admits that the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. The injury BA 7827/2020 4 sustained is only one injury, a lacerated wound on the scalp and there is no life threatening injuries sustained by the de facto complainant. Under the circumstances, custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be necessary. 7. In the result, the bail application is allowed and the applicants are directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. In the event of their being arrested, after interrogation and recovery, if any, they shall be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.
50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer and on the following conditions: (i) They shall appear before the investigating officer as BA 7827/2020 5 and when called for and co-operate with the investigation. (ii) They shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate or influence the witnesses. (iii) They shall not get involved in any similar offence during the currency of the bail. In case of breach of any of the above bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court for cancellation of the bail. Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE jg
Source: High Court of Kerala. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.