SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 80569

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
NAZAR T.M. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl. 2986/2022



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 29TH CHAITHRA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 2986 OF 2022 CR.NO.339/2022 OF MATTANCHERRY POLICE STATION, KOCHI PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

NAZAR T.M.

AGED 48 YEARS S/O.MOIDEEN,THENALIL HOUSE,PEZHAKKAPILLY P.O.,MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN - 686673 BY ADVS.P.RAHUL ASHWIN ANTONY RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SMT. SEETHA. S. (SR.PP)

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

19.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R Dated this the 19th day of April, 2022 This is an application filed u/s 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioner is the accused No.4 in Crime No.339/2022 of Mattancherry Police Station. The offences alleged are under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

3. The prosecution case in short is that on 4/4/2022 at about 6.00 p.m, the petitioner along with the remaining accused with intention to sell the ration articles in black market and thereby to make unlawful gain and profit attempted to remove the ration articles from the godown owned by the first accused on rent and further attempted to load the said articles in a goods carrier bearing Regn.No.KL17 U 6117 and thereby committed the offence.

4. Heard both sides and perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime and hence he is entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. She contended that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioner and if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.

6. Even going by the prosecution case, the petitioner is only the owner cum driver of the vehicle in which the ration articles were allegedly transported. He has no connection with the articles. According to the petitioner, it was called by the first accused for transportation of certain food grains to a rice mill at Kalady, Aluva on hire and accordingly he went to the place of occurrence and loaded 60 bags of rice in his lorry for onward delivery to the mill at Kalady. The lorry was already seized. The food articles were also recovered. The investigation is almost over. Considering the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary. For all these reasons, the petitioner is entitled to pre-

arrest bail on conditions.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) 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 petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for the purpose of discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

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

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of like nature while on bail.

(v) The petitioner 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 petitioner shall not leave State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JU

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top