SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shamzeer V.V.K vs State Of Kerala on 20 February, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1941

Bail Appl..No.663 OF 2020

CRIME NO.373/2019 OF KOLAVALLUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR

PETITIONER/ACCSED NO.1:

SHAMZEER V.V.K
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O.ISMAIL, RESIDING AT ‘ARAFA’, VALIAYAPARAMBATH
HOUSE, C.P.ROAD, ANDIPEEDIKA, PANNIYANNUR AMSOM
DESOM, P.O. PANNIYANNUR, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR
DISTRICT-670671

BY ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM

BY SRI. E.C.BINISH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.663 OF 2020

2

Bail Application No.663 of 2020

———————————————-

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.373

of 2019 of Kolavallur Police Station registered for offences under

Sections 498A and 354B of the Indian Penal Code. The de facto

complainant is the wife of the petitioner. The accusation in the

case in essence is that the accused has subjected the de facto

complainant to cruelty while they were residing together.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also

the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. Having regard to the materials on record, it seems

to me that it is a case that arose on account of the matrimonial

discord between the petitioner and his wife, the de facto

complainant.

5. In the circumstances, in the light of the decision of

the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of

Maharashtra, AIR 2011 SC 312, having regard to the nature and

gravity of the accusation, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to

the petitioner on the following conditions:
Bail Appl..No.663 OF 2020

3

i) The petitioner shall make himself available for
interrogation before the Investigating Officer within ten
days from today. He shall also make himself available
for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and
when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to
do so;

ii) If the petitioner is arrested prior to, or after his
appearance before the Investigating Officer in terms of
this order, he shall be released from custody on
execution of a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two sureties
each for the like sum.

iii) The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the
prosecution witnesses nor shall he attempt to tamper
with the evidence of the prosecution.

iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other offence
while on bail.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

DK

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