Sharafudheen vs State Of Kerala

Mohammed Nias C.P., J

This is an application is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail.

Petitioners are accused 1 to 3 in crime No.560/2023 of Kondotty police station, Malappuram district, registered for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 342, 355, 357, 323, 324, 325, 326, 302 and 201 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that a migrant labourer, Rajesh Manji was found near the house of one Varuvallipilakkal Alavi between 00-15 hours and 3.20 hours of 13.5.2023. Alleging that Rajesh Manji came to commit theft, accused Nos.1 to 3 who are the children of Alavi and accused Nos.4 to 9 who are the neighbours of Alavi, severely beat Rajesh Manji from the courtyard of the house, using plastic hose, wooden sticks, chappal and reaper, after tying his hands from behind, using a plastic rope.

They further kicked and beat Rajesh Manji repeatedly and took him to the road margin near Tavanur Valiya Juma Masjid and to destroy the evidence of the beating, removed the banian of Rajesh Manji and also removed the DVR of the CCTV installed in an office situated in between the house of Alavi and Tavanur Valiya Juma Masjid. Due to the assault of the accused, Rajesh Manji succumbed to the injuries. Thus, the accused committed the above offences.

I had earlier considered the bail applications of accused Nos.4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 and they were dismissed by orders dated 19.10.2023. The second applications filed by the accused Nos.7 and 8 in the same crime were also rejected by me by orders dated 10.1.2024 and 13.12.2023 in B.A.Nos.10919/2023 and 10174/2023, respectively.

I had clearly noticed the gravity and seriousness of the crime, particularly the postmortem report which showed that 57 injuries on the body of the deceased. Except for the nine injuries on the backside, all the other injuries would clearly show that they were multiple, blunt, force injuries including to the brain. Physical violence and strangulation are clearly seen from the postmortem report. The deceased was coming from a tribal area of Bihar and after considering the gravity and serious nature of allegations against the petitioner, the postmortem report, the chance of conviction on the basis of the evidence on record and also the apprehension raised by the prosecution that the accused are witnesses coming from the same area and the possibility of the witnesses being influenced and the trial being adversely affected cannot be ruled out.

Though the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the deceased was found lying in their house and the overt act was alleged only against the other accused, the record shows clear allegations made against these petitioners as well. Under the above circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners taking into account the seriousness of the allegations, the nature of the evidence in support of the charge,the apprehension raised by the prosecution about influencing or intimidating the witnesses as all of them hail from the same place, likelihood of release adversely affecting the trial, being well founded.

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.