Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

IMRAN, S/O.HAJIRUMMA, AGED 18 YEARS versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


IMRAN, S/O.HAJIRUMMA, AGED 18 YEARS v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE - Crl MC No. 2079 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 11696 (2 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2079 of 2007()

1. IMRAN, S/O.HAJIRUMMA, AGED 18 YEARS,
... Petitioner

2. ABBAS BHARI, S/O.ABDUL KHADER,

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :02/07/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 2079 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2007

O R D E R

The petitioners, who are accused 3 and 4, face allegations, inter alia, under Section 498A I.P.C. Another Bench of this Court granted an order under Section 438 Cr.P.C., but with the rider that the order was to remain for a period of one month, within which period the petitioners were directed to appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. They did appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. Regular bail was granted to them. Identical conditions as were imposed by this Court were imposed on the petitioners by the learned Magistrate. We are now concerned with Condition (a), which obliges the petitioners to report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays. The said condition was imposed by this Court as per order dt. 23.5.2007. About five weeks have now elapsed. The petitioners pray that the said condition may be deleted.

2. Technically the petitioners should approach the learned Magistrate and seek modification of the condition, as the conditions were imposed by the learned Magistrate at the time of grant of regular Crl.M.C.No. 2079 of 2007 2 bail and not by this Court, though of course, it is true that identical conditions are seen re-imposed by the learned Magistrate also.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners prays that unnecessary trauma of the petitioners approaching the learned Magistrate may be avoided and the condition may be suitably modified by this Court. This Court has the jurisdictional competence to do the same under Section 439 (2) Cr.P.C. also, it is submitted.

4. The learned Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer for modification. The learned Prosecutor only submits that such condition may be permitted to remain in force for some further period of time. I am satisfied that the request of the petitioners can be allowed.

5. This petition is accordingly allowed. It is directed that Condition (a) imposed on the petitioners as per order dt. 23.5.07, which is re-imposed by the learned Magistrate while granting regular bail, shall now remain in force only till 31.7.2007. (R. BASANT) Judge tm


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.