ARUN CHAND @ ARUN vs STATE OF KERALA

These bail applications are preferred by some of the accused in Crime No.234 of 2017 of Haripad Police Station for offences punishable under

sections 143, 147, 148, 427, 449, 120(b), 118, 201, 307 and 302 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code, now pending as S.C.No.373 of 2017 of

Additional Sessions Court-I, Mavelikkara. B.A.No.441 of 2018 is filed by accused Nos.3 to 6 and B.A.No.503 of 2018 is filed by the 8th

accused.

The prosecution allegation is that, due to the belief that one Jishnu was actively involved in the murder of Ullas, who was a close friend of the

accused and that Jishnu had also attempted to commit the murder of accused 2 and 5, all the accused totalling to 17 in number, entered into a

criminal conspiracy on 09.02.2017 and 10.02.2017 to commit the murder of the said Jishnu. In furtherance of the above conspiracy, on

10.02.2017 accused Nos.1 to 6 and 8 chased Jishnu, while he was travelling on a motor cycle along with his friend and attacked him. He escaped

to a nearby house and after breaking the door open, they attacked Jishnu with swords, sticks and arms and inflicted serious bodily injuries. He

died on the way to the hospital. Crime was registered and all the petitioners were arrested on various dates.

Learned senior counsel appearing for the 8th accused contended that the petitioner herein is absolutely innocent and has been roped in wrongly.

It was stated that, in the FIS, the first informant, who is the brother of the deceased, has referred to 6 named persons and 10 identifiable persons.

According to the learned senior counsel, petitioner herein is personally known to the first informant but, he did not mention about the petitioner

herein in the FI statement. According to the senior counsel, this establishes that the petitioner herein was not present among the assailants. It was

also contended that the allegation was that, 8th accused had used a hatchet. It was neither recovered nor the evidence on the body of the

deceased correspond to the use of a hatchet. It was further contended by the learned senior counsel that the 8th accused is in jail since long and

there are no other persons to look after his wife who is alone at home. It was contended that, since investigation is over, he may be released on

bail.

Learned counsel for accused Nos.3 to 6 also contended that, there was no justifiable reasons for the continued detention of accused 3 to 6. It

was contended that, they have no criminal antecedents and the investigation has been completed. There is no likelihood that the trial will be

completed in the near future.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. The evidence on record clearly shows that, it is a gruesome murder. The victim had

sustained several injuries and even after running for life and taking asylum in another home, house was broke open and he was attacked using

deadly weapons. The victim had sustained 32 injuries on the body. It appears to be a case of a planned murder.

Learned Public Prosecutor clarified that, though the first informant did not refer to the name of the 8th accused, he had specifically referred to

the name of the six persons. On the next day of the FI statement, he gave a very detailed statement to the investigating officer, wherein, the

presence of the 8th accused was specifically referred to. It was also stated that he was carrying a weapon. Though, it was alleged that the 8th

accused used a hatchet, in fact, the first informant had stated that, what was used was ""an axe like weapon"". Learned Public Prosecutor clarified

that, it was an assembled cycle part having a crude similarity with an axe. That weapon was also recovered. Corresponding injuries are seen on the

body.

This Court while dismissing the earlier bail application of other accused including the petitioners in both the bail applications, it was taken note of

the fact that death of the victim herein was part of a series of murders that took place. It was specifically done on an allegation that the victim was

involved in an earlier murder. It was noted that, consequent to the continuous three murders, in a short span of time, police picket was opened in

the village and police officers were put on duty. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, police outpost even now continued and strict vigilance is

kept over the activities of the locals. Learned Public Prosecutor also placed before me a confidential letter issued by the District Police Chief,

wherein, it was referred to that, in attacks between two quotation gangs, Ullas was murdered and friends of Ullas are planning to have a counter

attack. Directions were given to conduct discrete enquiry. Apprehension of the police chief regarding that repetition of attacks and counter attacks

appeared to be on record.

Having regard to these facts and also the fact that, petitioners are persons directly involved in the crime, I feel that, petitioners cannot be granted

bail at this stage. Bail applications are liable to be dismissed. However, the court below is directed to take necessary steps to ensure that the trial

of the case is taken at the earliest. Court shall give priority to this case and shall try to dispose of it, as early as possible, taking into consideration

that the matter needs an early hearing especially since the accused are in jail. Right to move Court in case of delay is reserved.