{"id":166868,"date":"2008-11-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008"},"modified":"2014-06-20T01:57:50","modified_gmt":"2014-06-19T20:27:50","slug":"ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nBail Appl..No. 5934 of 2008()\n\n\n1. AHAMMEDKUTTY @ KUNHAVA,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. MUHAMMED HAJI, S\/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY,\n3. HASSAN HAJI, S\/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY,\n4. MOIDU, S\/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY HAJI, PULIKKAL\n5. MUHAMMED FAZIL, S\/O.MOOSA, PULIKKAL\n6. AHAMMEDKUTTY @ KUNHU,\n7. MUHAMMED SHAMEEN, S\/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.BABU S. NAIR\n\n                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\n\nThe Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA\n\n Dated :24\/11\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                                 K. HEMA, J.\n         - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                         B.A. No. 5934 of 2008\n         - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n          Dated this the 24th day of November,2008\n\n                                   O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
        Petition for anticipatory bail.\n<\/p>\n
        2. The alleged offences are under sections 341, 323, 324,<\/p>\n
506(i), 307 read with section 34 IPC. Petitioners are accused 3 to<\/p>\n
5 and 7 to 10. According to prosecution, petitioners along with<\/p>\n
other accused in furtherance of common intention wrongfully<\/p>\n
restrained de facto complainant and various others, criminally<\/p>\n
intimidated them and assaulted them with intention to commit<\/p>\n
murder. De facto complainant and various other persons were<\/p>\n
injured by stabbing with knives and beating with stick. Crime<\/p>\n
no.432\/2008 was registered under the said sections. The incident<\/p>\n
occurred on 29-8-2008 at the premises of a mosque.<\/p>\n
        3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that accused<\/p>\n
in this case were assaulted by de facto complainant and others<\/p>\n
and two persons          died on the same day. Both of them are<\/p>\n
brothers. One of their brothers lodged a complaint and based on<\/p>\n
it, Cr. no.431\/2008 was registered under sections 143, 147, 148,<\/p>\n
341, 324, 302 read with section 149 IPC                       against de facto<\/p>\n
complainant and various others. Knives etc. were used for the<\/p>\n
offence. It was also submitted that the persons who are shown as<\/p>\n
accused 1 and 2 in this case died on the same day. In such<\/p>\n
BA 5934 \/08                         -2-\n<\/p>\n
circumstances,       this case is foisted against petitioners as a<\/p>\n
counter blast, it is submitted.\n<\/p>\n
       4. It is also submitted that the 4th accused in this case<\/p>\n
sustained serious injuries and he had to undergo surgery also. He<\/p>\n
was in the hospital for a period of one month. He is aged 85 years<\/p>\n
and he had witnessed his two sons being murdered by stabbing<\/p>\n
with knives etc. In spite of this unfortunate incident, it will be<\/p>\n
injustice, if petitioners were to undergo detention in prison, by<\/p>\n
refusal of anticipatory bail, it is submitted. Almost all the male<\/p>\n
members of the family were in the hospital as a result of the<\/p>\n
incident and two of them died also. It is also pointed out that two<\/p>\n
brothers of 4th accused and his grandchildren are also made<\/p>\n
accused in this case, with a view to see that all of them are kept<\/p>\n
behind the jail, it is submitted.\n<\/p>\n
       5. Learned counsel for petitioners also submitted that a<\/p>\n
partisan attitude is taken by police in connection with these two<\/p>\n
crimes. Though two persons died and entire family members are<\/p>\n
injured in the incident because of the influence of the opposite<\/p>\n
side, de facto complainant in the case was deleted from the array<\/p>\n
of accused in the main case, though specific allegations are made<\/p>\n
against him. It is also submitted that though 4th accused in this<\/p>\n
BA 5934 \/08                           -3-\n<\/p>\n
case sustained very serious stab wound and he was in the hospital<\/p>\n
for a very long period, offence under section 307 IPC was not<\/p>\n
included in Crime no.431\/2008, whereas in this case section 307<\/p>\n
IPC is included. Petitioners are likely to be harassed in the case, if<\/p>\n
anticipatory bail is refused, it is submitted.<\/p>\n
       6. It is also pointed out that there were only four persons in<\/p>\n
the F.I.R., out of whom two persons died and now several persons,<\/p>\n
who belong to the family of 4th accused, his sons and his<\/p>\n
grandchildren are included in the array of accused on a<\/p>\n
subsequent thought. It is also submitted that           the incident<\/p>\n
happened while deceased was attacked by the opposite side on<\/p>\n
account of some enmity regarding the dispute with respect to the<\/p>\n
administration of mosque committee. Petitioners family was in<\/p>\n
administration of the mosque committee for a very long period<\/p>\n
and this was not to the liking of the opposite side and hence they<\/p>\n
were attacked at the time of prayer in the mosque on a Friday<\/p>\n
when entire family members expected to assemble for prayer in<\/p>\n
the mosque. The fact that two persons died on the same day and<\/p>\n
various others were seriously injured from the side of petitioners<\/p>\n
itself would show that petitioners were attacked by opposite side<\/p>\n
and they acted in an aggressive manner by using weapons.<\/p>\n
BA 5934 \/08                          -4-\n<\/p>\n
Therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted, failing which<\/p>\n
petitioners will suffer irreparable injury and loss and they will be<\/p>\n
forced to under unwanted detention in prison, it is submitted.<\/p>\n
       7. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for de<\/p>\n
facto complainant were heard in detail. Learned counsel for de<\/p>\n
facto complainant submitted that in Crime no.431\/2008 almost all<\/p>\n
the accused     are in jail for the past     82 days, etc., whereas<\/p>\n
petitioners who are involved in the same incident who were<\/p>\n
responsible in inflicting serious injuries on various persons are<\/p>\n
now at large. This was done due to the fact that during pendency<\/p>\n
of petition for anticipatory bail filed by them an undertaking was<\/p>\n
recorded from learned Public Prosecutor that petitioners herein<\/p>\n
will not be arrested.\n<\/p>\n
       8. The nature of injuries sustained by various persons in<\/p>\n
this case will clearly show that there was a motivated attack by<\/p>\n
petitioners and others on de facto complainant, it is submitted.<\/p>\n
The name of de facto complainant was deleted by police from the<\/p>\n
array of accused in Cr.no.431\/2008 because he had only thrown a<\/p>\n
bucket during the course of incident and there is no allegation by<\/p>\n
any person that he had assaulted any of persons. His name was<\/p>\n
deleted for best reasons, since it was revealed on investigation<\/p>\n
BA 5934 \/08                        -5-\n<\/p>\n
that he is not involved in the crime, it is submitted.<\/p>\n
       9. It is also submitted that there is a clear case under<\/p>\n
section 307 IPC, since various persons sustained serious injuries<\/p>\n
as revealed from various wound certificates issued to the injured.<\/p>\n
De facto complainant himself sustained five incised wounds and a<\/p>\n
fracture in the incident. He sustained penetrating spinal cod injury<\/p>\n
with paraparcis and fracture to the vertebra. It was noted in the<\/p>\n
wound certificate that there was injury to spinal cod at cervico<\/p>\n
and thoracic junction.\n<\/p>\n
       10. Learned counsel for de facto complainant brought my<\/p>\n
attention to various wound certificates and submitted that various<\/p>\n
persons    also   sustained    deep     penetrating   wound.   One<\/p>\n
Unneerankutty, aged 45 years sustained a penetrating wound of 4<\/p>\n
x 2 cm. on the chest. He had also sustained another penetrating<\/p>\n
wound on the left iliac crest and at the renal angle. He also<\/p>\n
sustained lacerated injuries. Various injuries sustained by him are<\/p>\n
noted in the wound certificate which are of serious in nature. One<\/p>\n
Mohamed Haji sustained a stab injury 7 x 2 cm. in size on the<\/p>\n
abdomen, just below umbilicus. He was also taken for emergency<\/p>\n
haprotomy and in the operative findings         a deep penetrating<\/p>\n
wound was noted in the right lower umbitical quadrant 7 x 3<\/p>\n
 BA 5934 \/08                        -6-\n<\/p>\n
c.m. ). Therefore, it cannot be said that there was no attempt to<\/p>\n
commit murder and that no offence under section307 IPC is not<\/p>\n
made out.\n<\/p>\n
        11. It is also submitted that a car, in which accused were<\/p>\n
removed to hospital. on inspection by police, weapons were found<\/p>\n
and a case was also registered in respect of the said incident. As<\/p>\n
per the allegations in this case, petitioners are aggressors and<\/p>\n
they assaulted de facto complainant and others and inflicted stab<\/p>\n
wounds and hence, petitioners are not entitled to any benefit<\/p>\n
under any of the provisions. In an offence of this nature, it is not<\/p>\n
proper to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted.<\/p>\n
         12. Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed this<\/p>\n
petition and submitted that two factions assaulted each other<\/p>\n
using knives, stick etc., that too in the premises of a mosque and<\/p>\n
in the incident two persons died and various other persons<\/p>\n
sustained serious injuries. It cannot be proper to grant anticipatory<\/p>\n
bail, it is submitted. Weapons used for the offence by petitioners<\/p>\n
are to be recovered and if anticipatory bail is granted, it may not<\/p>\n
be possible to effect recovery. It is also submitted that various<\/p>\n
persons are injured in this case and wound certificates are<\/p>\n
available in the case diary as many as eight persons are injured in<\/p>\n
 BA 5934 \/08                        -7-\n<\/p>\n
the incident, out of which majority have sustained serious injuries<\/p>\n
on the fatal part of the body by use of knives. ((1) Beeran, S\/o.<\/p>\n
Enus; (2) Alavi, S\/o.Saidalavi; (3) Kabeer, S\/o. Saidalavi; (4)<\/p>\n
Unneerankutty; (5) Moideenkutty, S\/o.Enus; (6)Saidalavi, S\/o.Enu;<\/p>\n
(7) Rayinkutty, S\/o.Hamza; (8) Yousuf, S\/o.Kunchali Haji).<\/p>\n
         13. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the case<\/p>\n
diary reveals that two groups attacked each other using weapons<\/p>\n
like knives etc. and many of the persons are injured at the<\/p>\n
premises of a mosque and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory<\/p>\n
bail. This is particularly so, since the investigation is conducted<\/p>\n
into the allegations made and at this stage it is not possible to say<\/p>\n
who are the aggressor and who can be extended the benefit of<\/p>\n
self defence, if any. As per the case diary, it reveals that there<\/p>\n
were clashes between two groups at the premises of a mosque<\/p>\n
and both sides sustained injuries. It is also submitted that          if<\/p>\n
anticipatory bail is granted to petitioners, it is likely that there will<\/p>\n
be more clashes.\n<\/p>\n
       14. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that we are<\/p>\n
at the stage of bail and the question as to who is the aggressor<\/p>\n
and whether petitioners are entitled to self defence etc. may not<\/p>\n
arose now. Such facts can be considered only at the time of trial<\/p>\n
BA 5934 \/08                         -8-\n<\/p>\n
and not at this stage, it is submitted.\n<\/p>\n
       15. On hearing both sides and on consideration of rival<\/p>\n
contentions in detail and also the case diary, I find that several<\/p>\n
persons sustained penetrating wounds and incised wounds on<\/p>\n
prominent parts of the body. The incident occurred at the<\/p>\n
premises of a mosque. It is clear that weapons were used against<\/p>\n
the injured by the assailants. Though two persons from the<\/p>\n
petitioners’ side died and their father also sustained serious injury<\/p>\n
and entire family members are arrayed as accused in this case.<\/p>\n
        16. From the materials available in the case diary, it is not<\/p>\n
be possible for this Court to conclude at this stage that offence<\/p>\n
under section 307 IPC is not committed. However, I find that the<\/p>\n
4th accused is aged 85 years and he lost two of his sons at the<\/p>\n
hands of the assailants and the attack was witnessed by him. He<\/p>\n
himself suffered a serious injury and he had to undergo a surgery.<\/p>\n
He was in the hospital for a period of one month. Though an<\/p>\n
allegation is made in First Information Statement that some<\/p>\n
persons including 4th accused beat with stick, in the statement<\/p>\n
recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. allegation against 4th accused<\/p>\n
is absent. He has no case that 4th accused beat him or committed<\/p>\n
any act against him. In the above peculiar circumstances, I am<\/p>\n
BA 5934 \/08                         -9-\n<\/p>\n
satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to 4th accused. But I<\/p>\n
do not find it fit to grant anticipatory bail to other accused.<\/p>\n
Considering the nature of offence committed and the nature of<\/p>\n
investigation, which is required, includes the recovery of the<\/p>\n
alleged weapons used for the offence, I do not think it fit to grant<\/p>\n
anticipatory bail to other accused.\n<\/p>\n
       17. Hence, the following order is passed:-\n<\/p>\n
       (1)    The 4th accused         shall surrender before<\/p>\n
            Magistrate court concerned within seven days<\/p>\n
            from today and he shall be released on bail, on<\/p>\n
            his executing a bond for Rs. 25,000\/- with two<\/p>\n
            solvent sureties each, for the like amount, to the<\/p>\n
            satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, on the<\/p>\n
            following conditions:-\n<\/p>\n
            i)   He shall co-operate with the investigation<\/p>\n
                  and    he    shall   report   before   the<\/p>\n
                  Investigating    Officer as   and    when<\/p>\n
                  directed.\n<\/p>\n
            ii)   He shall not intimidate or influence any<\/p>\n
                  witness or tamper with evidence.\n<\/p>\n
BA 5934 \/08                        -10-\n<\/p>\n
      (2)   Prayer for anticipatory bail by other accused is<\/p>\n
            rejected.\n<\/p>\n
      This petition is partly allowed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                           K.HEMA, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
mn.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Bail Appl..No. 5934 of 2008() 1. AHAMMEDKUTTY @ KUNHAVA, … Petitioner 2. MUHAMMED HAJI, S\/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY, 3. HASSAN HAJI, S\/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY, 4. MOIDU, S\/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY HAJI, PULIKKAL 5. MUHAMMED FAZIL, S\/O.MOOSA, PULIKKAL 6. AHAMMEDKUTTY @ […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-166868","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAhammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-11-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-19T20:27:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-19T20:27:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1939,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-19T20:27:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-19T20:27:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-19T20:27:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008"},"wordCount":1939,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008","name":"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-19T20:27:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahammedkutty-kunhava-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-24-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ahammedkutty @ Kunhava vs The State Of Kerala on 24 November, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166868","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=166868"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166868\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=166868"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=166868"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=166868"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}