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.

Shabeer vs State of Kerala

Shabeer vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 31, 2021
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1674686

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
Case Number
Bail Appl./7120/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shabeer

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....as against them has become infructuous.4. the prosecution case in short is that on 18.7.2021 at7 pm, the petitioners along with the remaining accused formed an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of the assembly assaulted the de-facto complainant and his friends with weapon, with intention to commit murder and thereby committed the offence.5. heard both sides. -:3:-6. the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted thatthe they are absolutely innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. he further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioners 1 to 3/accused nos.1, 3 and 5 with the alleged crime and hence they are entitled to get bail. the learned public prosecutor opposed the bail application. he contended that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioners and if the petitioners 1 to 3/accused nos.1, 3 and 5 are released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.7. a perusal of annexure 2 order passed by the learnedmagistrate would show that the investigation is almost over. the statement of almost all the material witnesses were recorded. the said order would further show that the injury sustained by the de-facto complainant is not serious in nature. there is only lacerated wound and contusion. considering the allegations levelled against the petitioners, the custodial interrogation of thepetitioners does not appear to be necessary. for all these reasons, the accused nos. 1, 3 and 5/petitioners 1 to 3 are -:4:- entitled to pre-arrest bail on conditions. in the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-(i) the petitioners 1 to 3/accused nos.1, 3 and 5 shall bereleased on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for `1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.(ii) the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 10TH POUSHA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 7120 OF 2021 CRIME NO.327/2021 OF Nilambur Police Station, Malappuram PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 SHABEER, AGED 30 YEARS, SON OF MUHAMMED BASHEER, KUNDUKULI HOUSE, CHANDAKKUNNU, NILAMBUR P.O, MALAPURAM., PIN - 676542 2 MUHAMMED ANAS, AGED 29 YEARS, SON OF ALAVI, MANOLAN HOUSE, CHANDAKUNNU, NILAMBUR P.O, MALAPURAM. 3 MUHAMMED SAFVAN, AGED 23 YEARS, SON OF MUHAMMDALI, PALANGADAN HOUSE, CHANDAKUNNU, NILAMBUR P.O, MALAPURAM. 4 MUHAMMED SHABEER, AGED 26 YEARS, MUHAMMEDALI, PALANGADAN HOUSE, CHANDAKUNNU, NILAMBUR P.O, MALAPURAM. 5 MUHAMMED RASHIK, AGED 21 YEARS, MUHAMMEDALI, PALANGADAN HOUSE, CHANDAKUNNU, NILAMBUR P.O, MALAPURAM. BY ADV E.A.HARIS

RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY SRI. PRASANTH M.P PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -:2:-

ORDER

Dated this the 31st day of December, 2021 This is an application filed u/s 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1, 3, 5, 6 and 7 in Crime No.327/2021 of Nilambur Police Station. The offences alleged are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of IPC.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the accused Nos. 6 and 7 have already been arrested and hence the prayer as against them has become infructuous.

4. The prosecution case in short is that on 18.7.2021 at

7 pm, the petitioners along with the remaining accused formed an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of the assembly assaulted the de-facto complainant and his friends with weapon, with intention to commit murder and thereby committed the offence.

5. Heard both sides. -:3:-

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

the they are absolutely innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 with the alleged crime and hence they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. He contended that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioners and if the petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 are released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.

7. A perusal of Annexure 2 order passed by the learned

Magistrate would show that the investigation is almost over. The statement of almost all the material witnesses were recorded. The said order would further show that the injury sustained by the de-facto complainant is not serious in nature. There is only lacerated wound and contusion. Considering the allegations levelled against the petitioners, the custodial interrogation of the

petitioners does not appear to be necessary. For all these reasons, the accused Nos. 1, 3 and 5/petitioners 1 to 3 are -:4:- entitled to pre-arrest bail on conditions. In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 shall be

released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for `1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 shall

fully co-operate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for the purpose of discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 shall

appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m on every Saturday until further orders. They shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required by him.

(iv) The petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 shall not commit any offence of like nature while on bail. -:5:-

(v) The petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 shall not

make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 shall not leave State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE kp True copy P.A. To Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial