IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 4235 of 2007()
1. PRATHEESH, S/O.PRABHAKARAN, 29 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.A.C.DEVY
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :23/07/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
B.A.No.4235 of 2007
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2007
ORDER
Application for regular bail. The petitioner along with 7 others
faces allegations, inter alia, under Section 302 & 396 I.P.C. The crux
of the allegations is that the deceased was a carrier of hawala money.
He had an amount of Rs.2.45 lakhs in his possession. He travelled in
a bus upto Naduvattam and got down there with the alleged intention
of delivering an amount of Rs.2.45 lakhs, which he was carrying with
him. As he was proceeding to his destination at about 12.20 p.m on
20.05.2007, a Qualis car with 8 passengers reached the scene. The
occupants allegedly took away the deceased by use of force. The
vehicle sped away. The dead body of the deceased was found
abandoned by the side of the highway later. The crime was registered
on the basis of the complaint lodged by a person who allegedly had
witnessed the occurrence at the point where the deceased was taken
away by force. He claimed that he will be able to identify all the 8
accused. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner was arrested on
21.05.07. Accused 2, 3, 4 & 8 have also been arrested by now. The
identity of accused 5, 6 & 7 has been ascertained, but they are
making themselves scarce and are not available for arrest.
B.A.No.4235 of 2007 2
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner, who was remained in custody from 21.05.07, may now be
directed to be released on bail. There is no clinching material against
the petitioner. Further detention now, a period of about 60 days
having already elapsed, is unnecessary, unjust and unkind. Subject to
appropriate conditions, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail, prays
the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The learned Director General of Prosecution, who has
appeared before this Court, opposes the application vehemently. The
learned Director General of Prosecution submits that the allegations
are serious and grave. The investigation is not complete. Accused 1
to 4 and 8 have already been arrested and they are in custody.
Accused 5, 6 & 7 have to be arrested. A test identification parade has
got to be conducted. In any view of the matter, this is not a fit case
where the petitioner can be enlarged on bail at this early stage,
submits the learned Director General of Prosecution.
4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. At this early
stage of the proceedings, it is not necessary for this Court to embark
on a detailed discussion on the acceptability of the allegations or the
credibility of the data collected. Suffice it to say that, I am satisfied
that this is not a fit case where the petitioner deserves to be enlarged
on bail at this early stage. I need only mention that in coming to this
B.A.No.4235 of 2007 3
conclusion, I have taken note of the nature and gravity of the
allegations raised, the stage of the investigation, the quantum and
quality of the data collected as also the deleterious impact which such
a crime creates in the public mind. I have also taken note of the fact
that the investigator, in a serious crime like this, is certainly entitled
to further time to complete the investigation.
5. This application for regular bail is, in these circumstances,
dismissed. The dismissal of this petition will not in any way fetter the
rights of the petitioner to seek regular bail later before the Sessions
Court or this Court – not, at any rate, prior to 06.08.07. Investigator
shall in the meantime make every endeavour to complete the
investigation.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-