Kerala High Court
Shamsudeen Ashraf.T vs State Of Kerala on 17 May, 2024
BA 4079/24 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 27TH VAISAKHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 4079 OF 2024
CRIME NO.565/2024 OF PONNANI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SHAMSUDEEN ASHRAF.T,
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O SAIDALAVI MASTER, RESIDING AT THAYYIL HOUSE,
CHARAVANNUR, VALAVANNUR P.O, VALAVANNUR, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT,, PIN - 676551
BY ADVS.
J.R.PREM NAVAZ
SUMEEN S.
O.MOHAMED BASIL KOYA THANGAL
RESPONDENT/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE TIRUR
OFFICE OF THE DYSP, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN
- 676101
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI, M C ASHI, PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA 4079/24 2
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J.
...........................................................
B.A. No.4079 of 2024
.............................................................
Dated this the 17th day of May, 2024
ORDER
This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure seeking regular bail.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.565/2024 of Ponnani Police
Station, Malappuram District, of having committed offences punishable under
Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The gist of the prosecution allegation is that the accused being the
divorced husband of the defacto complainant committed sexual intercourse with
her, without her consent, from 26.09.2022 for a period of 8 months after divorcing
her and thereby committed the aforementioned offences. The petitioner was
arrested on 11.05.2024 and has been in judicial custody since then.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is
innocent of the allegations levelled against him and he has been falsely implicated
in the crime with ulterior motives. At any rate, continued custody of the petitioner
is unnecessary.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition.
6. After having heard the submissions on both sides, it is to be noticed that
the petitioner, who is stated to be the former husband of the victim, had filed a writ
petition on 16.4.2024 as W.P(C) No.15955/2024 alleging police harassment, and it
is after the filing of the said writ petition that the present complaint was filed by
the defacto complainant on 20.04.2024, eight months after the divorce.
Considering the nature of the allegations, the facts mentioned in the petition and
also after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public
Prosecutor, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed, and the petitioner shall be
released on 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 court having jurisdiction;
ii. He shall fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before
the investigation officer as and when directed.
iii. He shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence
or try to influence the witnesses.
iv. He shall not commit any offence while on bail;
v. He shall surrender his passport within seven days from the date of his release
before the Court concerned and if the release of the passport is required at a
later period, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an appropriate
application for the same before the court having jurisdiction. If he has no
passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect before the court concerned, on
the date of execution of the bond or within three days thereafter.
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.
It is made clear that it is within the power of police to investigate the
matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any,
given by the petitioner, even when the petitioner is on bail, as per the
judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others V. State
(NCT of Delhi) and another [2021 (1) KHC 663].
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE
okb/
//True copy//
P.S. to Judge
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 4079/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT OF THE
PETITIONER IN CRIME NO: 565 OF 2024 OF PONNANI
POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
