IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 5069 of 2007()
1. JINEESH @ JINAPPI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.RAJIV NAMBISAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :21/08/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
B.A.No.5069 of 2007
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of August 2007
O R D E R
Application for regular bail. Petitioner is the second accused.
He faces allegations inter alia under Section 395 I.P.C. The crux of
the allegations is that the petitioner is one of the three persons who
proceeded to the scene of the crime in furtherance of prior concert.
There, one of the three (not the petitioner) allegedly stopped the de
facto complainant who was proceeding on his motor cycle carrying
with him a large amount of cash and costly ornaments. The de facto
complainant was attacked and the gold ornaments and currency
which he was carrying were forcibly taken away by the said accused.
The petitioners, who were waiting in the motor cycle, allegedly sped
away from the scene of the crime when the actual miscreant returned
to the motor cycle. There is a further allegation that some of the
other co-accused had also reached the scene at the time of the crime.
The incident took place on 24/8/2006. The petitioner was arrested on
09/07/2007. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner has
subsequently been identified by the de facto complainant. The
petitioner continues in custody from 9/7/2007.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is absolutely innocent. He has no record of any criminal
antecedents. He has been unnecessarily brought on the array of
B.A.No.5069/07 2
accused. At any rate, the petitioner who has remained in custody
from 9/7/2007 does not now deserve to be in custody. He may be
enlarged on bail subject to appropriate conditions, prays the learned
counsel for the petitioner.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.
The learned Public Prosecutor submits that sufficient data has already
been collected to implicate the petitioner. Some of the co-accused
have not been apprehended so far at this early stage of investigation.
The petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail, urges the learned
Public Prosecutor. Case diary has been produced before me for my
perusal. Having considered the case diary, I find merit in the
opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I agree with the learned
Public Prosecutor that it is too early to consider the release of the
petitioner on bail.
4. In the result, this petition is dismissed. However, I may
hasten to observe that the petitioners shall be at liberty to move this
court for bail again at a later stage of the investigation not, at any
rate, prior to 04/09/2007. The investigating officer shall, in the
meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
// True Copy// PA to Judge
B.A.No.5069/07 3
B.A.No.5069/07 4
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF MAY2007