High CourtsSingle Bench

Muhammed Shaheed vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 4 July 2023 · Citation: (2023) 07 KL CK 0021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ziyad Rahman A.A, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 279, 338 · Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(b)(ii), 22(b), 29
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 4964 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 600 words

Ziyad Rahman A.A, J

1.

This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail.

2.

The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.429/2023 of Kondotty Police Station, Malappuram District, which was registered for the offences alleged against the petitioner and other accused are punishable under Sections 22(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3.

The prosecution case is that, on 13.04.2023 at 03.30 a.m., the petitioner along with 2nd accused was found travelling in a car bearing Registration No. KL 54 K 5929 possession of 0.9 grams of MDMA and thereby committed the offences. The crime was registered in such circumstances and the petitioner was arrested on the same day along with contraband articles and since then, he has been in judicial custody. This application for regular bail is submitted in such circumstances.

4.

Heard Sri. C.Y. Vinod Kumar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Sreeja V, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the state.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is innocent of all the allegations and was falsely implicated in the said case. He is prepared to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. It is further pointed out that the final report has already been submitted and there is no fruitful purpose in keeping the petitioner under detention any longer.

6.

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor would oppose the application for bail. It is pointed out that there are ample materials indicating the role of the petitioner and he was also involved in three other cases. One case was registered in the year 2018 for the offence punishable under Section 20(b (ii) of the NDPS Act and the other cases were for the offences under Sections 279 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and also under the provisions of Kerala Epidemic Diseases Ordinance Act, 2021 and therefore, dismissal of the bail application was sought.

7.

I have gone through the records and heard the contentions raised from both sides. It is true that there are allegations against the petitioner, and the matter is under investigation. The petitioner is also involved in one another case NDPS Act. However, the petitioner has been in custody since 13.04.2023, and the quantity involved is only 0.9 grams of MDMA. Now he has been in custody for the past more than 75 days. In such circumstances, I deem it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed, and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to the following conditions;

i) The petitioner shall be released on bail 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 jurisdictional Court.

ii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial court as and when required.

iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.

iv) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

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

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Magistrate shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.