Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Abdul Rasheed Vs. Abhuthahir

Abdul Rasheed vs Abhuthahir

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 20, 2012
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1009665

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Abdul Rasheed

Respondent

Abhuthahir

Excerpt

.....ba no.9759 of 2012 ---------------------------------------------------- dated this the 19th day of december 2012 order the petitioner is the third accused in crime no.36/12 of palakkad town north police station for having committed the offences punishable under ss.341, 324, 307 r/w 34 ipc. the prosecution allegation is that the petitioner along with the other accused, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and caused grievous injuries to him, using dangerous weapons. the petitioner submits that he is totally innocent and has been implicated with ulterior motives.2. the defacto complainant entered appearance through counsel. it was submitted on behalf of the complainant and the matter has been settled between the parties and that the defacto complainant has no further grievance in the matter. if that be so, the application is only to be allowed. the application is accordingly allowed and the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions : ba 9759/1”1. the petitioner shall execute a bond for rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jfcm-ii, palakkad.2. the learned magistrate shall ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, before granting bail to the petitioner.3. the petitioner shall report before the investigating officer on every wednesday between 9 am and 11 am, till final report is filed.4. the petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses.5. if any of the conditions is violated, the bail granted shall stand cancelled and the jfcm concerned on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such action as available to him in law. p.bhavadasan, judge sta ba 9759/12 3

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012 29TH AGRAHAYANA 193 Bail Appl..No. 9759 of 2012 ----------------------------------------- CRMP.3169/2012 of SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD CP.36/2012 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, PALAKKAD CRIME NO. 208/2012 OF PALAKKAD TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT ......................................................... APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.3: ------------------------------------------ ABDUL RASHEED, AGED 2 YEARS S/O. UMMER, KALLAMKODE ORIKKALIL VEEDU ELLATHUPARAMBU, PIRAYIRI PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) RESPONDENTS /DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/CW2 & STATE: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ABHUTHAHIR, AGED 2 YEARS S/O. HAMSA, POOCHINGAL VEEDU, PEZHUMKARA PALLIPURAM.P.O., PALAKKAD PIN-679305.

2. SAUKATHALI, AGED 2 YEARS S/O. IBRAHIM, ANAKKAL VEEDU, PEZHUMKARA PALLIPURAM.P.O., PALAKKAD-679305.

3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN-682031. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: DCS P.BHAVADASAN, J.

---------------------------------------------------- BA No.9759 of 2012 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of December 2012 Order The petitioner is the third accused in Crime No.36/12 of Palakkad Town North Police Station for having committed the offences punishable under Ss.341, 324, 307 r/w 34 IPC. The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner along with the other accused, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and caused grievous injuries to him, using dangerous weapons. The petitioner submits that he is totally innocent and has been implicated with ulterior motives.

2. The defacto complainant entered appearance through counsel. It was submitted on behalf of the complainant and the matter has been settled between the parties and that the defacto complainant has no further grievance in the matter. If that be so, the application is only to be allowed. The application is accordingly allowed and the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions : BA 9759/1”

1. The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the JFCM-II, Palakkad.

2. The learned Magistrate shall ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, before granting bail to the petitioner.

3. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Wednesday between 9 am and 11 am, till final report is filed.

4. The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses.

5. If any of the conditions is violated, the bail granted shall stand cancelled and the JFCM concerned on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such action as available to him in law. P.Bhavadasan, Judge sta BA 9759/12 3

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial