High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2019-09-18Bail Granted

Bail Application No. 6582 of 2019 (Fayaz Khan & others v. State of Kerala) - High Court of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:6582/2019

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: The Hon. Justice B. Sudheendra Kumar
Judgment Date: 2019-09-18
Court Decision / Holding: The applications are allowed; the petitioners are enlarged on bail on a bond of Rs. 40,000 each with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum, with conditions: (1) no direct/indirect political activity, (2) report to IO every Monday for four months (or until final report), (3) no entering Chathannur Village without leave of the Magistrate except for reporting, (4) no entry into MES Engineering College premises, (5) not to intimidate/witness tamper, (6) not to involve in other offences during pendency. If violated, the lower court may proceed under law, as held in P.K. Shaji v. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC 100).
Final Disposition: Bail Granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Fayaz Khan
Al-Ameen
Sanobar
Muhammed Shafi
Lookman @ Muhammed Lukuman
Askar
Rameez

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam (Sri. C.S. Hrithwik, P.P.)
State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam (Smt. V. Sreeja, P.P.)

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri. E.A. Haris
• Sri. Binu George

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri. C.S. Hrithwik, P.P.
• Smt. V. Sreeja, P.P.

Case Synopsis & Summary

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam disposed of three Bail Applications arising from Crime No. 535/2019 of Chathannur Police Station, Kollam. The petitioners (accused Nos. 1–7 across the connected applications) were arraigned for offences including 143, 147, 148, 323, 341 and 307 read with 149 IPC, arising from an incident on 21.08.2019 at MES College, Chathannur, where sympathizers of SDPI allegedly clashed with SFI workers after installing a flag mast and shouting pro‑SFI slogans, resulting in injuries to the informant and other violence at the campus. The prosecution contended that the petitioners are first‑time offenders, no grievous hurt to the informant, and that a large portion of the investigation is complete. It was further argued that, although the petitioners’ acts polluted campus peace, bail with stringent conditions was necessary to deter repetition. The court, while noting the stage of investigation and the absence of grievous injuries, granted bail to all petitioners subject to bonds of Rs 40,000 with two solvent sureties, and imposed several conditions including abstaining from political activity, regular reporting to the IO for four months, restricted entry to the village and the college area, non‑interference with witnesses, and prohibition from other offences during pendency. The order cites the principle in P.K. Shaji v. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC 100) regarding enforcement of bail conditions by the lower court.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 143 IPCSection 147 IPCSection 148 IPCSection 323 IPCSection 341 IPCSection 307 read with Section 149 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

P.K. Shaji v. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC 100) – principle on enforcement of bail conditions by lower courts

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Not explicitly detailed in the order. The document records the prosecution’s submissions that the petitioners are first‑time offenders, that no grievous hurt was caused, that recovery is complete, and that investigation is in an advanced stage; bail with stringent conditions was considered to prevent disturbance and repetition. The defense’s arguments are not elaborated in the order.

Contentions of Respondents

State, through Public Prosecutor, argued for bail with stringent conditions given campus tension and potential for repetition; the informant sustained non‑grievous injuries and investigation was largely complete.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
P.K. Shaji v. State of Kerala	AIR 2006 SC 100	Positive	Cited to justify enforcement of bail conditions by the trial court upon breach, without requiring recourse to the High Court.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Bail Application No. 6582 of 2019 (Fayaz Khan & others v. State of Kerala) - High Court of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR** **WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 27TH BHADRA, 1941** ## **Bail Appl..No.6582 OF 2019** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 5247/2019 DATED 29-08-2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , PARAVOOR** **CRIME NO.535/2019 OF Chathannur Police Station , Kollam** ## **PETITIONER/S/ACCUSED NO.1,2,3 & 5:** **1 FAYAS KHAN AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.AYOOB KHAN, KIZHAKKAZHIKATHU VEEDU,VALATHUMGAL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.** **2 AL-AMEEN, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O ABDUL KALAM, PUTHUVAL PURAYIDAM,VADAKKUMBHAGAM, PULLIKKADA CHERRY,KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE,KOLLAM DISTRICT.** **3 SANOBAR, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O KASIM KUNJU, BARANTHALVAYALTHODI,TEJAS NAGAR-83,THATTAMALA.P.O, ERAVIPURAM, AND NOW RESIDING AT SABEENA MANZIL, AUGRAHA NAGAR-12,THATTAMALA.P.O,KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4 MUHAMMED SHAFI, AGED 37 YEARS, S/.O SALAHUDEEN,SHAFI MANZIL, NIRAKATH THODIYIL VEEDU, KALLUMTHAZHAM.P.O,KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE,KOLLAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADV. SRI.E.A.HARIS** ## **RESPONDENT/S/COMPLAINANT:** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.** ## **SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.09.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6578/2019,Bail Appl..6719/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Bail Appl..No.6582 OF 2019** **2** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR** **WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 27TH BHADRA, 1941** **Bail Appl..No.6578 OF 2019** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 5322/2019 DATED 29-082019 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVUR CRIME NO.535/2019 OF Chathannur Police Station , Kollam** ## **PETITIONER/S/ACCUSED NO.6 & 7:** **1 ASKAR AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED SALI, THUNDIKKAZHIKAM VEEDU, MUKKAM CHERRY, MAYYANADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2 RAMEEZ, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL MAJEED, SAMEERA MANZIL, KIZHAKKENCHERY, VADAKKUMKARA, THAZHUTHALA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADV. SRI.E.A.HARIS** ## **RESPONDENT/S/COMPLAINANT:** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.** **SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.09.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6582/2019, Bail Appl..6719/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Bail Appl..No.6582 OF 2019** **3** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR** **WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 27TH BHADRA, 1941** **Bail Appl..No.6719 OF 2019** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 5323/2019 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVUR** **CRIME NO.535/2019 OF Chathannoor Police Station , Kollam** ## **PETITIONER/S/4TH ACCUSED:** **LOOKMAN @ MUHAMMED LUKUMAN AGED 21 YEARS, (A4), S/O.HUSSAIN, VALIYAVEEDU, KATTADIMUKKU, VADAKKEMYLAKKADU CHERI, THRIKKOVILVATTOM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADV. SRI.BINU GEORGE** **RESPONDENT/S/STATE:** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.** **SMT.V.SREEJA,PP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.09.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6578/2019, Bail Appl..6582/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Bail Appl..No.6582 OF 2019** **4** ## **O R D E R** The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 7 in Crime No. 535 of 2019 of Chathannur Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 341 and 307 read with Section 149 IPC. 2. The is that on prosecution allegation 21.08.2019 at 4.00 p.m., the petitioners, who are the sympathizers of SDPI, installed a flag mast of campus front, in front of MES college, Chathannur. The informant and other SFI workers shouted pro SFI slogans. Then the first accused stabbed on the ambit of the informant with a knife, causing injuries on him. The accused Nos. 2 to 7 manhandled other SFI sympathizers. **Bail Appl..No.6582 OF 2019** **==> picture [8 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** 3. Accused Nos.1 to 5 were arrested on 22.08.2019 and accused Nos. 6 and 7 were arrested on 24.08.2019. 4. Heard. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioners are not involved in any other offence of similar nature. It appears that the injured did not sustain any grievous hurt in the incident. The recovery had been already effected. It appears that the major part of the investigation as regards the petitioners is almost complete. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that if the petitioners are granted bail, stringent conditions have to be incorporated, so as to desist the petitioners from repeating similar offences, as the acts of the petitioners **6** **Bail Appl..No.6582 OF 2019** had already polluted the peaceful atmosphere in the campus. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the stage of investigation and also taking into consideration of the fact that the petitioners are the first time offenders, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. In the result, these applications stand allowed and the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on condition of each of the petitioners executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) each, with two solvent sureties each, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Magistrate and subject to the following further conditions: 1. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly get involved in any political activity **Bail Appl..No.6582 OF 2019** **7** till the logical end of the above case. 2. The petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 9.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m., for four months or till the filing of the final report, whichever is earlier. 3. The petitioners shall not enter into Chathannur Village, without the leave of the learned Magistrate, except for the purpose of reporting before the Investigating Officer as directed above, till the logical end of the case. 4. The petitioners shall not enter into or go near to MES Engineering College, Chathannur, till the logical end of the above case. **Bail Appl..No.6582 OF 2019** **8** 5. The petitioners shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation. 6. The petitioners shall not get involved in any other offence during the pendency of this case. Needlessto state that if the petitioners violate any of the above said conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law, without any reference to this Court, as held by the Apex Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [AIR 2006 SC 100]. **Sd/-** ## **B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR** ## **JUDGE** RK/18.09.2019