High CourtsSingle Bench(2020) 11 KL CK 0201

Muhammed Unais And Ors vs State Of Kerala And Ors

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 30 November 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Menon, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 7585, 7586 Of 2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

24 paragraphs · 520 words
1.

The applicant in BA.No.7585 of 2020 is the 4th accused in Crime No.464 of 2020 and he is also the 4th accused in another Crime No.484 of 2020

of Valanchery Police Station, Malappuram, in which, he has filed an application for bail as BA.No.7586 of 2020 . He was arrested in both these cases

on 24.10.2020, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, and 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. The

prosecution case, in brief, in both these cases are that:

2.

The applicant, being an employee of Arma Lab Health in Valanchery, allegedly collected samples for conducing the Covid-19 test from various

persons and the samples were purportedly sent to Kozhikode Micro Health Laboratories and to R Cell Laboratories for test. But, after having

collected most of the samples, only a portion of the samples were actually sent for testing and the remaining samples were not sent at all and after

having received the results in some of the samples which were sent, the applicant allegedly concocted and forged fictitious sample results stating that

they had tested negative for Covid-19 and thus allegedly cheated the aforesaid laboratories which did not conduct the test and also cheated the

persons to whom the test results were conveyed. The applicant states that he has been in custody since 24.10.2020 that he is only a driver of Arma

Lab and that he has got nothing to do with the test or the issuance of the certificates. And, therefore, he may be released on bail since further

custodial interrogation or any other purpose for the investigation is not to be accomplished by his incarceration. Hence, he seeks bail.

3.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor. I am not going to enter into a finding as to whether the

applicant is only a driver and that his role is very limited or not and I leave it for the trial court to decided on that point. However, the facts would

indicate that the applicant has been in custody since 24.10.2020 and he has already been subjected to interrogation. There is nothing to be recovered

from him. Under the circumstances, further incarceration of the applicant may not serve any purpose.

4.

In the result, the applications are allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty

thousand only), with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on following further conditions:

(i) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9.00 AM and 12.00 PM for a period of two months or till filing of the

final report whichever is earlier.

(ii) He shall not intimidate or influence witnesses and tamper with evidence.

(iii) He shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail period.

In case of breach of any of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

The bail applications are allowed.