Moosa vs State of Kerala

MOOSA vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 30, 2020

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1811784

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/1811784
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Oct 30, 2020
Case Number: Bail Appl./6761/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

MOOSA

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

..... person in consequence to his murder. scientific examination has been done and theinvestigation is in the final stage, and it has become essential to question the applicant with regard to the discovery of the aforesaid crucial piece of evidence. he was directed to appear on 13.09.2020, but he did not respond to the notice issued to him under section 41a, cr.p.c. the learned public prosecutor, therefore, submits that he may be directed to surrender before the investigating officer and has ensured that he will not be subjected to any third-degree method of investigation and shall be produced before the jurisdictional court at the earliest.7. considering the fact that it is a case ofmurder and that there are only shreds of evidence collected by the investigating agency and that in 2007 the investigation was handed over to the crime branch and now that the investigation has made some headway, the applicant is under obligation to cooperate with the investigation. therefore, 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 without any delay, where he is at liberty to apply for regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously. with these observations, the bail application is disposed of. sd/- dkr ashok menon judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 8TH KARTHIKA, 1942 CRIME NO.08/CB/MPM/07/2007 OF CBCID, MALAPPURAM, Malappuram PETITIONER/S: MOOSA AGED 36 YEARS, SON OF KOYA, MUSLIYARAKATH HOUSE, CHUNGATHARA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679334. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031. 2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE-II, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676505. 3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER EDAKKARA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679331. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.C.K.SURESH, SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Dated this the 30th day of October 2020 This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

2. The applicant is the sole accused in Crime

No.205/2005 of Edakkara Police Station                         and now the
case    is    being       investigated       by   the    Crime     Branch   as
Cr.No.08/CB/MPM/07.            The    crime       was    registered      under

Section 302 of the I.P.C.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that in the year 2005 the body of one Hydru, aged 75 years, was found near a shed adjoining the Edakkara forest area and it was revealed that he was murdered. The aforesaid crime was registered, but the investigation did not make much headway. The applicant was the prime suspect and he was called to the police station for the

purpose of the investigation, a number of times.                         It is
alleged      by     the    applicant       that   he    was    subjected    to
third-degree         methods    of     questioning.           He   approached

this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.12712/2020 and this Court directed that he shall not be harassed or subjected to third-degree methods and the investigating officer and other police officers were also directed to ensure that investigation is conducted in a scientific manner and that no attempt be made to extract a confession from the applicant using force.

4. It is submitted that now the prosecution is again requiring his presence for the purpose of investigation. And he fears that he may be subjected to harassment as well as torture and every attempt would be made to extract a confession from him. The applicant, therefore, approaches this Court for anticipatory bail.

5. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor at much length.

6. The learned Public Prosecution has taken this Court through various statements and materials that have been collected to indicate the possible involvement of the applicant in the crime. It is pointed out that there are a number of contradictions in the statement, which he had given to the police. It is also stated that stains of human blood was discovered in one of the drawers of a table in his possession, which could have been there because he had

kept    the   money    which       was       allegedly        stolen    from       the
deceased      person        in     consequence           to     his      murder.
Scientific      examination              has      been        done      and        the

investigation is in the final stage, and it has become essential to question the applicant with regard to the discovery of the aforesaid crucial piece of evidence. He was directed to appear on 13.09.2020, but he did not respond to the notice issued to him under Section 41A, Cr.P.C. The learned Public Prosecutor, therefore, submits that he may be directed to surrender before the investigating officer and has ensured that he will not be subjected to any third-degree method of investigation and shall be produced before the jurisdictional court at the earliest.

7. Considering the fact that it is a case of

murder and that there are only shreds of evidence collected by the investigating agency and that in 2007 the investigation was handed over to the Crime Branch and now that the investigation has made some headway, the applicant is under obligation to cooperate with the investigation. Therefore, 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 without any delay, where he is at liberty to apply for regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously. With these observations, the bail application is disposed of. Sd/- dkr ASHOK MENON JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2020 Same Parties MOOSA vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon