High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeBail granted; petition allowed with conditions ...

FAMEER v. STATE OF KERALA and THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION

Case / Petition Number:Bail Application No. 315 of 2024
Neutral Citation:/

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C.S. Dias
Judgment Date
2024-01-19
Court Decision / Holding
The bail application is allowed. The petitioner Fameer is to be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties for the like sum, subject to conditions: (i) appearance before IO every Saturday for one month or until final report; (ii) no inducement or tampering with witnesses; (iii) no commission of offences while on bail; (iv) surrender of passport, if any; (v) furnish present and permanent addresses and mobile number; (vi) court may cancel bail on violation; (vii) applications to modify bail conditions may be moved; (viii) the IO may investigate and effect recoveries even while on bail, in line with Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663).
Final Disposition
Bail granted; petition allowed with conditions as stated above; investigation can proceed during bail as per cited doctrine.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • FAMEER

Respondents

  • STATE OF KERALA
  • THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VADAKKEKAD, VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • E. C. Ahamed Fazil

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Smt. Neema T.V.

Case Synopsis & Summary

Fameer, the fourth accused in Crime No. 821/2023 of Vadakkekad Police Station, Thrissur, seeks bail under Section 439 CrPC. The case arises from an incident around 3:30 a.m. on 17 August 2023, in which the complainant and the injured Faiz were travelling in an autorickshaw when the accused allegedly followed on a scooter, restrained the complainant, and the first accused repeatedly attacked Faiz with a sword, causing grievous injuries. The charges include sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326, 294(b), 509(ii), and 307 read with 149 IPC. The petitioner, the fourth accused, was arrested on 4 November 2023 and has remained in judicial custody since then; the prosecution contends the offences were committed by a common plan with the first accused, while the defense asserts false implication and notes there is no specific overt act attributed to the petitioner in the FIR. The investigation is described as practically complete, and recovery has been effected. The Public Prosecutor opposes bail but contends there is no overt act against the petitioner. The court, after considering the materials, finds no specific overt act against the petitioner, his detention for 67 days is unnecessary, and, in view of the absence of antecedents, grants bail on a Rs.50,000/- bond with two sureties, under conditions including weekly appearances before the IO, restrictions on tampering with witnesses, no commission of offences, passport surrender, furnishing address details, and the court’s power to cancel bail for violations, while noting the principle of allowing investigation during bail as per Sushila Aggarwal (Supreme Court) cited in 2020 (1) KHC 663.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326, 294(b), 509(ii), 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Applicant contends false implication, points to absence of a specific overt act against the petitioner in the FIR, and notes he has been in judicial custody since 04.11.2023 with the investigation practically complete; he is willing to abide by conditions and seeks release on bail.

Contentions of Respondents

Public Prosecutor submits that, although there is no explicit overt act against the petitioner, he aided the first accused and the injury to Faiz was grievous; investigation is complete and recovery effected; while bail may be warranted, the court must assess risk and public interest.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another2020 (1) KHC 663PositiveCited as authority for the principle that investigation and recoveries may continue during bail, aligning with Supreme Court guidance referenced by the Kerala 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 FAMEER v. STATE OF KERALA and THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

1 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` FRIDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 29TH POUSHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 315 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.821/2023 OF Vadakkekad Police Station, Thrissur ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` FAMEER AGED 36 YEARS S/O. ABOOBACKER, KALATHIL HOUSE, THAZHATHEPADI DESOM, ERAMANGALAM, VELIYAMCODE, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 695512 ``` ``` BY ADV E.C.AHAMED FAZIL ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VADAKKEKAD VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION, VADAKKEKAD POST, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 679562 ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.NEEMA .T.V, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 ## **C.S.DIAS,J** ## **======================** ## **Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 ----------------------------------Dated this the 19[th] day of January, 2024** ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the fourth accused in crime No.821/2023 of the Vadakkekad Police Station, Thrissur, registered against the accused (presently four in number), for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Secs.143, 147,148, 341,323, 324, 326, 294(b), 509(ii), 307 read with Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was arrested on 4.11.2023. 2. The gist of the prosecution case is that: In pursuance of an enmity between the first accused and the injured, around 3.30 a.m on 17.8.2023 while the defacto 3 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 complainant and injured Faiz were travelling in an autorickshaw from Guruvayoor to Veliyamkode, the accused followed them on a scooter and when they reached the place of occurrence, the accused wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and injured. In prosecution of their common intention, the first accused repeatedly chopped the injured Faiz on various parts of his body with a sword. The said person sustained grievous injuries. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Sri.Ahamed Fazil.E.C the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema T.V, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the crime. 4 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 Even going by the first information report, there is no specific overt act alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 4.11.2023, which is now 67 days. The investigation in the case is practically complete. The petitioner is willing to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She submitted that the injured had a miraculous escape from death. She handed over the treatment-cumwound certificate to substantiate the grievous injuries sustained by the injured. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that there is no specific overt act alleged against the accused other than stating that he aided the first accused for 5 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 commission of the offences. She also submitted that the investigation in the case is practically complete and the recovery has been effected. 6. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, particularly taking note of the fact that there is no specific overt act alleged against the petitioner, he has been in judicial custody since 4.11.2023, the investigation in the case is practically complete, recovery has been effected and he has no criminal antecedents, I am of the view that the petitioner’s continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him executing a 6 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of one month or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; 7 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 (iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail; (iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond; (v) The petitioner shall furnish his present address and permanent address, and his mobile phone number to the court below and the Investigating Officer; (vi) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. 8 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 (vii) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below. (viii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Sushila** **Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1)** **KHC 663].** sd/- sks/19.1.2024 **C.S.DIAS, JUDGE** 9 Bail Application No. 315 of 2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 315/2024`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` Annexure 1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 08.01.2023 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 1898 OF 2023 PASSED BY FIRST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, THRISSUR ```