SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Abdul Sephic @ Shafeek vs The State Of Kerala on 22 October, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 30TH ASWINA, 1940

Bail Appl..No. 6496 of 2018

CRIME NO. 438/2018 OF MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 5:

1 ABDUL SEPHIC @ SHAFEEK,
AGED 27 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL RAHIMAN @ PODIYABA HAJI, RESIDING AT
MORATHANA HOUSE,
KADAMBAR, MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

2 MARIYAMMA,
AGED 63 YEARS,
W/O ABDUL RAHIMAN @ PODIYABA HAJI, RESIDING AT
MORATHANA HOUSE,
KADAMBAR, MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

3 MOHAMMED ALI,
AGED 41 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL RAHIMAN @ PODIYABA HAJI, RESIDING AT
MORATHANA HOUSE,
KADAMBAR, MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

4 ABDUL RAZAK,
AGED 43 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL RAHIMAN @ PODIYABA HAJI, RESIDING AT
MORATHANA HOUSE,
KADAMBAR, MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

5 MAIMOONA,
AGED 37 YEARS,
W/O.ABDUL RAZAK, RESIDING AT MORATHANA HOUSE,
KADAMBAR, MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.
SRI.T.MADHU
SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI
Bail Appl..No. 6496 of 2018 2

RESPONDENT/STATE:

THE STATE OF KERALA
THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MANJESHWAR POLICE
STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031.

BY SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.10.2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

2. The applicants herein are accused Nos.1 to 5 in Crime

No.438 of 2018 of the Manjeshwar Police Station. In the aforesaid

crime, they are accused of having committed offence punishable

under Sections 498A and 377 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The de facto complainant is the wife of the 1 st applicant

herein. Their marriage was solemnized on 16.12.2017. There are

no issues in the wedlock. The prosecution allegation is that from

the inception, the 1st applicant herein subjected the lady to
Bail Appl..No. 6496 of 2018 3

incessant mental as well as physical cruelty. She was also

subjected to unnatural sexual intercourse and when she refused,

she was beaten up. Insofar as the rest of the accused are

concerned, it is alleged that they abetted the acts of the 1 st

accused.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicants submitted

that they are innocent of all the allegations. According to the

learned counsel, the allegation of unnatural sexual abuse is not

true. It is further submitted that insofar as applicant Nos.2 to 5 are

concerned, the allegations are somewhat general in nature.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted

that the allegations insofar as it relates to the 1 st accused are very

grave. No serious objection is raised with regard to accused Nos. 2

to 5.

6. Having gone through the materials on record, I am of the

view that prima facie there are materials, which show that the 1 st

applicant herein had subjected the victim to serious physical,

mental and sexual abuse. In that view of the matter, I see no
Bail Appl..No. 6496 of 2018 4

reason to arm him with an order of pre-arrest bail. However,

insofar as applicant Nos.2 to 5 are concerned, their custodial

interrogation does not appear to be necessary for an effective

investigation.

7. In the result, this application will stand partly allowed.

This application, insofar as it relates to the 1 st applicant is

concerned, will stand dismissed. The applicant Nos.2 to 5 shall

appear before the investigating officer within ten days from today

and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if they are proposed to

be arrested, they shall be released on bail on each of them

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand

only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above

order shall be subject to the following conditions:

i) The applicant Nos.2 to 5 shall co-operate with the
investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer
on every Saturdays between 10 A.M and 1 P.M. for a period of
one month or till final report is filed whichever is earlier.

ii) They shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of
the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts
to the court or to any police officer.

iii) They shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

Bail Appl..No. 6496 of 2018 5

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the

application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in

accordance with the law.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
DSV/23/10/18

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation