Hammed Shihab v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/29TH KARTHIKA, 1937 Bail Appl..No. 6633 of 2015 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 1050/2015 OF NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT ---------------------- PETITIONER :
--------------------- AHAMMED SHIHAB S/O.ABU THENDIYAN, AGED 28 YEARS CHAPPANANGADI, VATTAPARAMBU PONMALA, PIN - 676 503.
BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M. CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PIN - 682 031.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT PIN - 676 001.
R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn
A.HARIPRASAD, J.
-------------------------------------- B.A. No.6633 of 2015 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of November, 2015
ORDER
Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.1050 of 2014 of Nadakkavu Police Station registered alleging an offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. He seeks prearrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2.
Prosecution case, in short, is that on 19.09.2015 at 00.30 hours in the night, the lorry seized by the Sales Tax Intelligence Officer was stolen away and the unauthorised electric goods kept in the lorry were removed.
3.
Heard both sides.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not directly involved in the incident. First accused was arrested and merely on his confession, the second accused is implicated in the case. 5.
Learned Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The report of the investigating officer is produced for scrutiny. It is seen from the report that the prosecution has a case that the second accused removed the articles from the lorry and the articles could not be recovered so far. It is submitted by the learned Prosecutor that custody of the second accused
BA No.6633/2015 is necessary for recovery of the articles.
Considering the nature of allegations, following directions are issued:
In the event the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer within a period of two weeks from today and submits himself for interrogation, he shall be produced before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction on the date of surrender itself. In that event, he is free to move for bail and the learned Magistrate shall consider the application on merits and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, if possible on the date of surrender itself. If the petitioner does not surrender before the investigating officer within the said time, the investigating officer is free to arrest him, as if no order is passed in this case. Application is disposed of.
A. HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.
cks