Subeesh P U vs State Of Kerala

Ziyad Rahman A.A, J

This is an application for regular bail.

The petitioner is the 7th accused in Crime No.121/2023 of Info Park Police Station, Ernakulam. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 342, 323, 324, 364A, 307, read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that, on 24.01.2023 at 7 p.m., the 3rd accused, who is the friend of the husband of the defacto complainant, tactfully took the defacto complainant and her husband in a vehicle to a place near Info Park, Kakkanad. While they were travelling, four other persons came in another car and obstructed the vehicle in which the defacto complainant and her husband were travelling. Later, the persons who arrived in the car, along with the

3rd accused, forcibly took the husband of the defacto complainant in their vehicle and demanded ransom. It is also alleged that, while in the custody of the accused, the husband of the defacto complainant was assaulted as well. The complaint was registered based on the information furnished by the defacto complainant. At the time of registration of the F.I.R., the petitioner was not one of the accused. Later, during the course of the investigation, the petitioner was implicated. The role assigned to the petitioner in the commission of the crime is that, while accused Nos.1 to 5 have taken the victim in their car, the directions to reach the destination were given by accused Nos.6 and 7. The petitioner was arrested in connection with the said investigation on 26.01.2023. Since then, the petitioner has been under judicial detention.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. It is pointed out that, even according to the First Information Statement and other relevant documents, the petitioner's role is not evident. By placing reliance upon the contents of F.I.S., it was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, according to the defacto complainant, the victim was taken away forcibly in a car by the accused Nos.1 to 5. Therefore, the implication of the petitioner as an accused was without any basis.

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor would oppose the aforesaid contentions. It is pointed out that during the course of the investigation it was revealed that the 6th and 7th accused gave necessary directions as to the destination of the accused while there were travelling along with the victim. It is pointed out that the investigation is now in progress, and if the petitioner is released on bail, it is likely to adversely impact the investigation. It was further pointed out that the petitioner is involved in Crime No.261/2003 and 945/2019 of Ernakulam Town South Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC. Therefore, the dismissal of the bail application is sought.

I have gone through the records and heard the contentions raised from both sides. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the physical involvement of the petitioner is not discernible from the materials placed on record. Even as per the F.I.S., only five persons were involved in the commission of the crime. It is true that there are some allegations against the petitioner as well as the 6th accused, for providing directions to accused Nos.1 to 5 as to the destination to which they wanted to reach. However, the materials based on which such conclusions arrived, are not discernible. Therefore, it is a matter of investigation. Now the petitioner has been in custody since 26.01.2023. Taking note of the limited role of the petitioner and also the other relevant inputs, I do not find that there is any necessity to keep the petitioner under detention any longer. Therefore, the petitioner can be released on bail by imposing appropriate conditions to ensure that he is cooperating with the investigation.

In the result, this bail application is allowed, and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to the following conditions.

The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation.

The Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11 a.m. on every Thursday until the filing of the final report. The petitioner shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.

The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

In case  of  violation  of  any  of the above  conditions, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.