Mujeeb vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Aug 05, 2021

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1654823

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1654823
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice K.Haripal
Decided On: Aug 05, 2021
Case Number: Bail Appl./5444/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mujeeb

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....was registered alleging offence punishable under sections 341, 324, 308 read with 34 of the ipc.2. the alleged incident had happened on 06.05.2021 and thecrime was registered on 07.05.2021. going by the prosecution records, on 06.05.2021 at 10:00 p.m, when the defacto complainant had questioned the accused for having misbehaved with his wife at place by name chappappady in parappanangadi municipality, the accused persons wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and hit him with an iron rod and also stabbed on his chest. he was also attacked with a stone; the first accused had used the iron rod, if it was not resisted, it would have caused fatal injuries to him and thus the crime was registered. now apprehending arrest, the petitioners have moved this court under section 438 of the cr.p.c.3. the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it was a political clash that it was the offshoot of the incident in crime 111/2021 of parappanangadi police station.4. this has been strongly denied by the learned senior publicprosecutor and has opposed the bail application. according to her, all the three petitioners are history-sheeters, that they have nine, seven and two cases respectively pending against them which are assault cases. the first accused had used an iron rod against the defacto complainant, in which he sustained an injury of 3x1x1c.m on the parietal region that in the nature of the allegations, the petitioners may not be released on bail. after having heard counsel on both sides, i am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. the petitioners had used dangerous weapons against the defacto complainant. the first accused had used an iron rod and the second accused had used stone. all the petitioners are history-sheeters. in the nature of the allegations, the weapons used by them have to be recovered. it is possible only after custodial interrogation. the application is dismissed. sd/- k.haripal judge jms/05.08 //true copy// p.a to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 5444 OF 2021 IN CRIME NO.183/2021 OF PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: 1 MUJEEB AGED 36 YEARS VADANAKKATH HOUSE MALAPPURAM 2 IQBAL KRISHNAPARAMBIL HOUSE 3 MANSOOR VADANAKATH HOUSE BY ADV P.E.SAJAL RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SR.PP - SMT. SREEJA V. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioners are accused in Crime No.183/2021 of Parappanangadi Police Station, which was registered alleging offence punishable under Sections 341, 324, 308 read with 34 of the IPC.

2. The alleged incident had happened on 06.05.2021 and the

crime was registered on 07.05.2021. Going by the prosecution records, on 06.05.2021 at 10:00 p.m, when the defacto complainant had questioned the accused for having misbehaved with his wife at place by name Chappappady in Parappanangadi Municipality, the accused persons wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and hit him with an iron rod and also stabbed on his chest. He was also attacked with a stone; the first accused had used the iron rod, if it was not resisted, it would have caused fatal injuries to him and thus the crime was registered. Now apprehending arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it was a political clash that it was the offshoot of the incident in crime 111/2021 of Parappanangadi Police Station.

4. This has been strongly denied by the learned Senior Public

Prosecutor and has opposed the bail application. According to her, all the three petitioners are history-sheeters, that they have nine, seven and two cases respectively pending against them which are assault cases. The first accused had used an iron rod against the defacto complainant, in which he sustained an injury of 3x1x1c.m on the parietal region that in the nature of the allegations, the petitioners may not be released on bail. After having heard counsel on both sides, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. The petitioners had used dangerous weapons against the defacto complainant. The first accused had used an iron rod and the second accused had used stone. All the petitioners are history-sheeters. In the nature of the allegations, the weapons used by them have to be recovered. It is possible only after custodial interrogation. The application is dismissed. Sd/- K.HARIPAL JUDGE Jms/05.08 //True Copy// P.A to Judge

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2021 Same Parties Mujeeb vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice K.Haripal