High CourtsSingle Bench

Shajahan vs State of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 29 February 2012 · Citation: (2012) 02 KL CK 0029

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sasidharan Nambiar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 66E, 67, 67A · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 34, 385
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1149 of 2012
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

3 paragraphs · 340 words

Justice M. Sasidharan Nambiar

1.

Petitioner is the first accused in Crime No. 24 of 2012 of Kadakkal Police Station registered for the offences u/s 385 read with 34 of IPC and Section 66(E), 67 and 67(A) of Information Technology Act. Apprehending arrest, petition is filed u/s 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure for anticipatory bail. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. The argument of Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that there was some money dispute between the defacto complainant and his co-brother relating to the construction of a residential building and Zakhir Hussain, the co-brother borrowed money from the petitioner towards the construction and when he requested for return of money, it ended in a quarrel and the defacto complainant along with Zakhir Hussian, in order to avoid repayment of money, cooked up the story and petitioner has not committed any offence and in such circumstances, in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, he be released on bail.

2.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and made available the case diary. On perusing the case diary, I do not find that petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail as sought for as granting anticipatory bail would adversely affect the investigation. In the nature and circumstances of the case, even custodial interrogation may be necessary. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner then submitted that petitioner may be permitted to surrender before the Investigating Officer for interrogation and thereafter be permitted to move an application for bail before the concerned Magistrate. Petitioner is permitted to surrender before the Investigating Officer for interrogation within ten days from today. After completing interrogation, petitioner shall be produced before the concerned Magistrate without delay. In that event, petitioner is entitled to move for bail. If such an application for bail is filed before the learned Magistrate, learned Magistrate to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law without delay. If petitioner fails to appear within ten days, Investigating Officer is free to arrest him. Petition is disposed.