Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1946 BAIL APPL. NO. 2241 OF 2024 CRIME NO.58/2024 OF MELPARAMBA POLICE STATION, Kasargod PETITIONER/S: SAYYED RAFEEQUE, AGED 33 YEARS S/O. SAYYED AHAMED,R/AT. CHEMANAD HOUSE, CHEMANAD KALANAD POST, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671317 BY ADV P.RAKESH THAMBAN RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: PRASHANTH MP...GP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
------------------------------- B.A.No. 2241 of 2024 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2024
O R D E R
This is an application for bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2. The petitioner is the 8th accused in Crime
No.58 of 2024 of Melparamba Police Station. He allegedly had committed the offences punishable under Section 120B, 364A, 342, 323, 506(1), 384 and 389 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code 1860.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The prosecution allegation are the
following:- The 3rd accused, after establishing acquaintance with the defacto complainant, assured that a laptop could be purchased for him at her intervention. On that pretext, on 25.01.2024, she
took the defacto complainant to Mangalapuram. After brnging him to a hotel at Mangalapuram, snapped his nude photos and making use of the photographs, the accused persons threatened him that a prosecution will be initiated against with the allegation that he committed rape on the 3rd accused. On such threat and
coercionm the accused extracted Rs.5 lakhs from the defacto complainant. During the course of investigation, complicity of the petitioner was
revealed and he was added as the 8th accused.
5. The petitione would contend that he did not
involve in the alleged crime and without any material or evidence, he has been implicated in the crime. He is innocent. The investigation in the matter has been progressed considerably and there is no reason or justification for his further detention.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit
that considering the seriousness of the offence and the possibility of interfering with the investigation by the petitioner in the event of his release on bail, this petition deserves only to be dismissed. It is also submitted that the investigation is in its initial state and unless the petitioner is interrogated in custody, the investigation cannot be taken to its logical conclusion.
7. The offences alleged against the petitioner as well as other accused are very serious. The
submission of the learned counel for the petitioner that petitioner has absolutely no connection with the crime is not able to be accepted when the materials collected during the investigation, particularly CCTV footages establish his complicity with the crime.
8. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, and considering the nature and gravity of the
offence, I am convinced that release of the petitioner at this stage will adversely affect the process of investigation. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail at this stage. In the result, the bail application is dismissed with a direction that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall not be subjected to any harassment and after necessary process of investigation, shall
be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate within the time stipulated in Sec.57 of the Code. Sd/- P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE SM APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2241/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.58/2024 OF MELPARAMBA POLICE STATION Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE DISMISSAL ORDER IN CRL.MC.NO.217/2024 DATED 24.02.2024