Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 1015 OF 2022 CRIME NO.62/2022 OF KASABA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT PETITIONER/ACCUSED: MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA, AGED 52 YEARS, KULAKKATTIL HOUSE, KULUKKALLUR VIA, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD, PIN - 679 337. BY ADVS. SRUTHY N. BHAT RAHUL SUNIL P.M.RAFIQ M.REVIKRISHNAN AJEESH K.SASI MITHA SUDHINDRAN SRUTHY K.K P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.) RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031. BY SMT.SEETHA.S, SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2022, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1028/2022, 1032/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 1028 OF 2022 CRIME NO.62/2022 OF KASABA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: 1 BIJU, AGED 51 YEARS, SON OF KUMARAN, KEECHAMATTATHIL HOUSE, ARAKKURUSSI, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 678 582. 2 RAMESH, AGED 31 YEARS SON OF SIVAN, CHUNGATH HOUSE, ARAYANKODE, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 695 124. 3 VIJEESH, AGED 33 YEARS, SON OF RAJAN, KUNNATH HOUSE, ARAYANKODE, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 695 124. 4 RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 67 YEARS SON OF RAMAN NAIR, THARAYIL HOUSE, VELUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 601. 5 DEEPU, AGED 29 YEARS, SON OF PRABHAKARAN, KAIPEDATH HOUSE, ARAYANKODE, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 695 124.
BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031. BY SMT.MAYA M.N, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2022, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1015/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 1032 OF 2022 CRIME NO.62/2022 OF KASABA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: 1 MUHAMMED SHEREEF AGED 31 YEARS SON OF ABDUL LATHEEF, MOOTHANNUR HOUSE, KELAKKODE, THANEERPANTHAL, KINASSERY, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 701. 2 SAFEER AGED 39 YEARS SON OF ALIMUHAMMED, 14/209, SAFEER MANZIL, KALMANDAPAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 013. 3 SADATH, AGED 44 YEARS, SON OF HUSSAIN, 20/83, KPM NAGAR, PUNNILATH APARTMENT, KODUNTHIRUPULLY, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678 004.
BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031. BY SMT.MAYA M.N, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2022, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1015/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
[Bail Appl. Nos.1015/2022, 1028/2022, 1032/2022] These are the applications for regular bail.
2. Petitioners in these cases are accused in Crime No.62
of 2022 of Kasaba Police Station, Palakkad District, alleging the commission of offences under Sections 365, 368, 394 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66C of the Information Technology Act. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners wrongfully confined the brother of the de-facto complainant and others at a hotel in Palakkad and caused hurt to them and also committed dacoity by steeling certain amounts of money, mobile phones and ATM cards. The petitioners in Bail Application No.1032 of 2022 are accused Nos.1, 6 and 12, while the petitioners in Bail Application No.1028 of 2022 are accused Nos.2,4,7,8 and 9 and the petitioner in Bail Application No.1015 of 2022 is the 5th accused.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
would submit that the petitioners and the de-facto complainant / his brother are engaged in scrap business. It is submitted that the brother of the de-facto complainant and his friends had come to Palakkad to talk and settle some business disputes between the parties. It is submitted that both the petitioners and the de- facto complainant and his brother and others have been engaging in various businesses for the past ten years and while there are certain disputes between them, there was no reason for the petitioners to kidnap, confine and commit dacoity as alleged. It is submitted that after a man missing complaint was registered at the instance of the de-facto complainant, the petitioners had themselves revealed to the police their location, which itself shows that the petitioners had not wrongfully confined the brother of the de-facto complainant and his friends, is the submission. Finally it is submitted that the petitioners have been in custody from 27.01.2022 and continued detention of the petitioners is not necessary for the purpose of any investigation.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of
bail. It is submitted that accused Nos.1, 3, 6, 10, 11 and 12 have criminal antecedents. The details of the various cases registered against the aforesaid persons are made available to me. As already noted, among the accused in the case, only some among them have approached this Court for bail. Accused Nos.1, 6 and 12, against whom the criminal antecedents are reported are the petitioners in Bail Application No.1032 of 2022. Accused Nos.1 and 12 are accused in two cases each, while accused No.6 is stated to be accused in five other cases. There is no allegation that the petitioners in Bail Application Nos.1028 of 2022 and 1015 of 2022 have any criminal antecedents. It is submitted that considering the criminal antecedents of accused Nos.1, 6 and 12, they are, at any rate, not entitled to be released on bail. It is submitted that the investigation conducted thus far reveals that the petitioners along with the other accused in the case have kidnapped the brother of the de-facto complainant and his friends as part of the attempt to settle financial disputes between the parties. It is submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to be released on bail.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case, I am of the opinion that the accused No.1, 6 and 12 are not entitled to be released on bail at this point of time as they have criminal antecedents. If accused Nos.1, 6 and 12 are released on bail, there is every chance that material witnesses may be influenced or intimidated in the matter. In so far as the other accused in the case are concerned, I am of the view that they can be granted bail subject to conditions to ensure that they do not interfere with the investigation in any manner.
6. In the result, Bail Application No.1032 of 2022 will
stand dismissed and Bail Application Nos.1015 of 2022 and 1028 of 2022 will stand allowed. I am of the opinion that the continued detention of the petitioners in Bail Application Nos.1015 of 2022 and 1028 of 2022 is not necessary for the completion of investigation into the matter. I also note that the petitioners and the de-facto complainant are stated to be in the business of dealing in scrap metal for the past ten years and there are various business disputes between them.
7. The petitioners in Bail Application Nos.1015 of 2022 and 1028 of 2022 will be released on bail subject to the following conditions.
(1) Petitioners shall execute separate bonds for sums of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;
(2) Petitioners shall not attempt to or to influence or intimidate the de-facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.62 of 2022 of Kasaba Police Station, Palakkad District;
(3) Petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in Crime No.62 of 2022 of Kasaba Police Station, Palakkad District, every Saturday at 11.00 A.M until 30.04.2022 and thereafter whenever called upon to do so;
(4) Petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on
bail. If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.62 of 2022 of Kasaba Police Station, Palakkad District, may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK