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

2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 45631

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.UBAID, J
FIRDOUSE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./4136/2016



Advocates:
SRI.K.RAKESH

Bail can be granted when investigations are complete, with appropriate conditions to mitigate risks of interference.

Headnote:

Bail - Criminal Procedure - IPC and Kerala Sand Act - Sections 20, 23, 379 IPC, 439 CrPC - Court granted bail considering investigation status and conditions to prevent interference.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, accused in a case of illegal sand transportation, sought regular bail after being in custody since May 2016. His bail application was initially denied by the Magistrate.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the investigation was largely complete and there was no need for continued custody. Conditions were imposed to ensure the petitioner did not interfere with investigations or witness testimonies.

Issues: Whether to grant bail to the petitioner in light of ongoing investigations and previous allegations of similar offenses.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the completion of investigation justified granting bail, balanced with measures to prevent interference with the ongoing legal process.

Final Decision: The petitioner is granted bail with specific conditions.

ORDER

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime No.201 of 2016 of the Kolathur Police Station registered under Section 379 IPC and under Sections 20 and 23 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act , 2001 (Sand Act). He seeks regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure . The application filed by him for regular bail was dismissed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Perinthalmanna on 25.05.2016. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since

23.05.2016.

2. The prosecution case is that at about 4.15 a.m.

on 14.05.2016 the petitioner was found illicitly transporting some quantity of sand in a car. It is not known how much quantity could be transported in a car. Anyway, there is another crime also wherein the allegation is that the petitioner transported sand illicitly in a mini lorry. Some other crimes are also reported against him. Though Section 379 IPC was also incorporated by the police, mainly the offence comes under Section 20 of the Sand Act. I feel it appropriate to direct him to make security deposit as a condition for bail, in view of the involvement in other crimes.

3. This application for regular bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that investigation is still in progress, and that if the accused is now released, he will definitely obstruct the investigation.

4. On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the materials including the case diary and the report of the investigating officer, I find that investigation in this case is practically over, and that the petitioner can be now released on appropriate conditions. I find that the Investigating Officer has already questioned the material witnesses, and has collected the necessary materials for a prosecution. I do not find the necessity of continued detention of the petitioner in custody.

In the result, this application for bail is allowed. The petitioner will be released on bail on his executing a bond with two solvent sureties for ₹25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Perinthalmanna.

Bail is granted on condition that;

a. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 am to 11 a.m on all Fridays for a period of two months.

b. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdictional limits of the Kolathur Police Station for two months.

c. The petitioner shall not in any manner influence or intimidate the witnesses and he shall not have any contact with the material witnesses directly or over telephone or otherwise.

d. The petitioner shall make a security deposit of ₹20,000(Rupees Twenty Thousand only) in the court below as a further condition for bail. The amount of security deposit will be released on conclusion of trial. It will be subject to forfeiture in case of absence during trial without sufficient reason.

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top