Muhammed Nisar.P.V Vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala 24 Jan 2022 Bail Application No 264 Of 2022 (2022) 01 KL CK 0177
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Bail Application No 264 Of 2022

Hon'ble Bench

Gopinath P, J

Advocates

K.M.Firoz, M.Shajna, K.P.Muhammad Arif, Noushad K A

Final Decision

Allowed

Acts Referred
  • Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 120B, 212, 216A, 399, 402

Judgement Text

Translate:

Gopinath P., J

1. This is an application for regular bail.

2. The petitioner herein is the 62nd accused in Crime No.175 of 2021 of Karippur Police Station, Mallapuram District, alleging commission of offences

under Sections 399, 402, 120B, 216A and 212 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 21.06.2021, at around

02.30AM, the petitioner along with the other accused in the case, who were stated to number 64, came to the Karippur Airport at Calicut for the

purpose of committing dacoity and taking away some gold, which was being brought by one Mohammed Shafeeq. It is alleged that the aforesaid

Shafeeq had tried to smuggle in a large quantity of gold and was intercepted by the Customs Department. One associate of the aforesaid Shafeeq was

waiting outside the Airport for receiving him. On realizing that the aforesaid Mohammed Shafeeq had been apprehended by the Customs Department,

his associate, who is the 2nd accused in the case, is stated to have left the place. These large number of persons, who had come to the airport with an

intention to commit dacoity and to steal the gold from Mohammed Shafeeq and his associate, chased his associate using several cars and a tipper

lorry. It is alleged that one of the cars met with a serious accident and accused Nos.9 to 13 died owing to the said accident.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that the petitioner has been

roped in only on account of the fact that he was part of a whatsapp group, in which the other accused were also members. It is submitted that the

petitioner was arrested on 01.12.2021 and has completed 54 days in custody. It is submitted that this Court had granted bail to the accused No.57 by

order dated 22.12.2021 in Bail Application No.9105 of 2021. It is submitted that the role ascribed to the petitioner herein is no different from the role

ascribed to the aforesaid accused No.57.

4. I have heard the learned Public counsel also. The learned Public Prosecutor has explained the details of the crime alleged to have been committed

by the petitioner along with the other accused. It is submitted that the petitioner was a part of a smuggling syndicate, which tried to steal smuggled

gold from the other accused in the case. It is submitted that the petitioner deserves no leniency and is not entitled to bail.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that several of the accused have been released on bail by this

Court and by the Sessions Court and the role ascribed to the petitioner is no different from the role ascribed to the petitioners in those cases, I am of

the view that the petitioner can be granted bail subject to conditions identical to those imposed while granting bail to accused No.57 in Bail Application

No.9105 of 2021.

6. In the result, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that 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 a sum of Rs. 5,00,000 /- (Rupees five lakhs only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the

satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction. One surety shall be a close relative.

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer on every Monday for a period of two months between 11.a.m and 12 noon, till filing of the charge sheet.

(iii) The petitioner shall not enter into Kannur district for a period of 2 months or till filing of the final report; whichever is earlier.

 (iv) The petitioner shall surrender his original passport before the court concerned. If he is not having a passport, he shall file an affidavit regarding the same

before the jurisdictional court, within a week of his release on bail.

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise 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.

(vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

(vii) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the prior permission of the jurisdictional court.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More