Shakkeer vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 334 Ker

  Crl.MC.5029/2020                   1

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

  WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 16TH POUSHA, 1942

                         Crl.MC.No.5029 OF 2020(G)

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1635/2018 OF DISTRICT COURT &
                    SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR

    CRIME NO.217/2018 OF Town West Police Station , Thrissur


PETITIONER/S:

                SHAKKEER
                AGED 36 YEARS
                S/O. MUHAMMED, ARIKALATH HOUSE, KARIKKAD, THRISSUR

                BY ADV. SRI.P.S.ANISHAD

RESPONDENT/S:

                STATE OF KERALA
                REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
                KERALA, ERNAKULAM


OTHER PRESENT:

                PP E.C.BINEESH

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD           ON
06.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
   Crl.MC.5029/2020                   2



                              V.G.ARUN, J.
               -----------------------------------------------
                     CRL.M.C.No. 5029 of 2020
               -----------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 6th day of January, 2020

                                ORDER

Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.217 of 2018 of Thrissur

West Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under

Section 22(b)(ii)B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance

Act. The crime was registered pursuant to the seizure of 2.60

Kilograms of dried ganja from the 1 st accused. On questioning, the first

accused stated that the petitioner was his accomplice and had

escaped on seeing the Police. The petitioner was arrested on

12.11.2018 and granted bail subject to certain conditions, including

the condition that the petitioner should not indulge in any other

offence while on bail. Later, the prosecution sought cancellation of the

bail alleging that the petitioner had violated the bail condition by

getting involved in three crimes. According to the prosecution, Crime

No.1122 of 2018 was registered against the petitioner and four others

at the Kunnamkulam Police Station on 3.12.2018 for offences

punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 341, 308, 506 read with 149

IPC. Thereafter, Crime No.954 of 2019 was registered on 27.9.2019 for

offences under Sections 447, 294B, 506 and 427 of IPC. Again, Crime

No.997 of 2019 was registered on 12.12.2019 for the offences

punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 294B and 506 of IPC. The

petitioner opposed the application and produced some medical records

to prove that, on all three occasions, he was admitted in hospitals,

either on the date of occurrence of the alleged crime or on the

subsequent days. It was contended that the petitioner was actually the

victim and not the aggressor. The learned Sessions Judge repelled the

objection and held that, irrespective of whether the petitioner suffered

injuries in the incidents or not, the fact of the matter is that he had

violated the bail condition by getting involved in the crimes. Based on

the said finding, bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled as per

Annexure-A1 order dated 7.3.2020.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the

contentions urged before the Sessions Court, of the petitioner being

the victim in the three crimes and having been deliberately made an

accused in order to make it appear that he had violated the bail

condition. Relying on certain medical records, attempt was made to

contend that, petitioner was not the aggressor and had been falsely

implicated in the crimes.

3. As rightly held by the learned Sessions Judge, the Court need

be concerned only about the petitioner's involvement in offences while

he was on bail. This fact is amply established by registration of the

crimes against him and it is impossible to believe that three different

crimes were registered against the petitioner to make it appear that he

had violated the bail condition. Hence, I find no reason to interfere with

Annexure A1 order.

In the result, the Crl.M.C is dismissed.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN, JUDGE

vgs

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2020 OF THE HON'BLE SESSIONS JUDGE, THRISSUR IN CRL.MP NO.4507/2019 IN CRL M.C NO.1635/2018 IN CRIME NO.217/2018 OF THRISSUR WEST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT

ANNEXURE-A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER THE SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR DATED 22.11.2018 IN CRL M.C NO.1635/2018 IN CRIME NO.217/2018 OF THRISSUR WEST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT

ANNEXURE-A3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DAED 03.12.2018 OF ROYAL HOSPITAL ,KUNNUMKULAM

ANNEXURE-A4 TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME NO.975/2019, DATED 9.10.19 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE-A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME NO.259/2020 DATED 21.03.2020 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE-A6 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CRIME NO.990/2019 DATED 14.10.2019 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE-A7 A TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE DATED 12.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE TALUK HOSPITAL KUNNAMKULAM

ANNEXURE-A8 A TRUE COPY OF THE CAUSALITY REGISTRATION CARD OF THE MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL , THRISSUR DATED 15.10.2019