Kerala High Court
Tharis Sidhique vs State Of Kerala on 21 December, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 10995 OF 2023
CRIME NO.1534/2023 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT BAIL APPL. 10212/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
THARIS SIDHIQUE
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O SIDHIQUE, PALLETH HOUSE, KARUMALOOR, NORTH PARAVOOR
TALUK, ALANGAD, NORTH PARAVOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 683511
BY ADV LIFFY P. FRANCIS
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, HIGH COURT P O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. T.V. NEEMA, SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.12.2023,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA No.10995 of 2023
2
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.J
---------------------
B.A.No.10995 of 2023
---------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of December, 2023
ORDER
This is the 2nd bail application filed by the petitioner/2 nd
accused under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973, seeking regular bail.
2. The petitioner is the accused No.2 in Crime No.
1534/2023 of Perumbavoor Police Station, Ernakulam District,
for having allegedly committed offences punishable under
Sections 511 of 364 r/w Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that, on
07.10.2023 at about 3.00 pm, near Munnar - Perumbavoor road,
the petitioner caught hold of the de-facto complainant and tried
to kidnap him in a car and thereafter, to obtain monetary
benefit, the accused 1 to 6 forcibly persuaded the de-facto
complainant to execute a sale letter regarding the sale of his
Innova Car in favour of the 1st accused and taken away the car
and thereby he committed the above offences.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
would say that the petitioner is innocent and falsely implicated
with ulterior motives. At any rate, he points out that the
petitioner is in custody from 11.10.2023, and continued custody
of the petitioner is unnecessary.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition.
6. After having considered the submissions of the
learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public
Prosecutor, the accusations against the petitioner, and the fact
that he has been in custody since 11.10.2023, though there are
antecedents against the petitioner, there is no apprehension
raised by the prosecution that if released on bail, the petitioner
is likely to abscond I hold that bail can be granted to the
petitioner. Accordingly, this application is allowed, and the
petitioner is granted bail subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on
executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the
like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;
(ii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer
on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for
three months or as and when directed to appear.
(iii) He shall not intimidate or attempt to influence
the witnesses, nor shall he tamper with the evidence
or do anything that might adversely affect the trial;
(iv) He shall not commit any offence while on bail;
(v) He shall not leave the Country without the
permission of the Court having jurisdiction;
(vi) In case of violation of any of the above
conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be
empowered to consider the application for
cancellation of bail and pass appropriate orders in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE
BNG
