Harif vs State of Kerala

HARIF vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jan 04, 2021

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1709970

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/1709970
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Jan 04, 2021
Case Number: Bail Appl./8333/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

HARIF

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....20 and 23 of the kerala protection of river banks and regulation of removal of sand act.3. the prosecution case, in brief, is that on22.07.2020 at about 12.35 am, the applicant along with other co-accused, totalling six in number, obstructed the de facto complainant, a civil police officer and his colleagues from discharging their public duty while they were in the process of intercepting a lorry which was allegedly transporting river sand and they forcibly took away the lorry.4. the applicant states that he is innocent and the allegations are not true and that accused 1 to 5 were already apprehended and thereafter produced before thejurisdictional court and granted regular bail. the applicant has been implicated due to a mistaken identity since he was involved in another case of similar nature for transporting of illegal sand. he has only come out of his house to see what washappening and was not actively involved and has been falsely implicated in this case, and therefore, he seeks anticipatory bail.5. heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned public prosecutor.6. the learned public prosecutor vehemently opposes the application on the ground that the applicant is involved in three other cases of sand mining. he is a notorious in that field and in the instant case he had attacked the police officers, who had attempted to intercept the lorry which was carrying illegal sand and attempted to commit murder by hitting the vehicle in which the officers were travelling. the allegation against the applicant is very grave. whether it is a case of mistaken identity, is a matter which needs tobe decided during trial. therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the extraordinary and exceptional remedy of anticipatory bail in this case. hence,.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON MONDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 14TH POUSHA, 1942 CRIME NO.375/2020 OF Nilambur Police Station , Malappuram PETITIONER/S: HARIF, AGED 34 YEARS, PANTHAR HOUSE, THOTTINTAKKARE, MAMPAD PO, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676542. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.SANTHOSH PETER, SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Dated this the 4th day of January 2021 This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

2. The applicant is the 6th accused in Crime No.375/2020 of Nilambur Police Station for having

allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 307, 332, 353 and 327 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and under Sections 20 and 23 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of sand Act.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on

22.07.2020 at about 12.35 AM, the applicant along with other co-accused, totalling six in number, obstructed the de facto complainant, a Civil Police Officer and his colleagues from discharging their public duty while they were in the process of intercepting a lorry which was allegedly transporting river sand and they forcibly took away the lorry.

4. The applicant states that he is innocent and the allegations are not true and that accused 1 to 5 were already apprehended and thereafter produced before the

jurisdictional       court    and    granted      regular        bail.      The
applicant     has    been        implicated    due        to    a   mistaken
identity     since    he    was    involved    in    another         case   of
similar nature for transporting of illegal sand.                             He
has   only    come    out    of     his   house     to     see      what    was

happening and was not actively involved and has been falsely implicated in this case, and therefore, he seeks anticipatory bail.

5. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the application on the ground that the applicant is involved in three other cases of sand mining. He is a notorious in that field and in the instant case he had attacked the police officers, who had attempted to intercept the lorry which was carrying illegal sand and attempted to commit murder by hitting the vehicle in which the officers were travelling. The allegation against the applicant is very grave. Whether it is a case of mistaken identity, is a matter which needs to

be decided during trial.              Therefore, the applicant is
not     entitled     to     the   extraordinary           and    exceptional
remedy of anticipatory bail in this case.                         Hence, the
applicant       is     directed       to     surrender          before    the
investigating officer within two weeks.                         In the event
of    his      being      arrested,        after     interrogation        and
recovery,      if    any,    he   shall     be     produced      before   the

jurisdictional court, where he is at liberty to apply for regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day. Sd/- ASHOK MENON dkr JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2021 Same Parties HARIF vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon

Public prosecutor Police officer Police Station Public duty High Court de facto