IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 29TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 831 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME 102/02 OF THIROORANGADI POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- HAMEED @ ABDUL HAMEED @ JIM HAMEED, S/O.HASSAN, KOONAMVEEDU, OZHUKOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS: STATE ------------------ THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIROORANGADI POLICE STATION-THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No. 831 OF 2008 F ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 18th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for regular bail. Petitioner is the 5th accused. Altogether there are six accused persons. Accused Nos.1, 5 and 6 have been arrested. Accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 are absconding. The alleged incident took place on 25.2.2002. The de facto complainant, a jeweller who was returning to his house on foot, was allegedly attacked and he was robbed of cash and gold ornaments which he was carrying along with him. Crime was registered promptly. Investigation did not yield any tangible result. It was reported as an undetected case. Accused No.1 was later arrested in some other crime on 28.7.07. A6, another accused person, was also arrested. Interrogation of those accused gave to the police clues to resolve this crime. The crux of the allegations now raised is that accused Nos.1 to 4 had actually BA.831/08 : 2 : participated in the commission of the crime. They proceeded to the de facto complainant in a car. One of them allegedly attacked the de facto complainant and took away the articles. Accused Nos.5 and 6 had allegedly acted as the brain behind the attack. They are the conspirators. The petitioner was arrested on 1.1.08. He continues in custody from that date. Investigation is in progress. Accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 are yet to be arrested. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor or the learned counsel for the petitioner are not able to specify whether accused Nos.1 and 6 have now been enlarged on bail. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. He may now be enlarged on bail, it is prayed. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the allegations reveal a very serious crime. Investigation is not complete. Some of the co-accused have not been BA.831/08 : 3 : apprehended yet. At this early stage of investigation, the petitioner may not be granted regular bail, it is prayed. 5. I am satisfied that there is merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. The serious nature of the crime must be taken into account. The stage of investigation must also be considered. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am not persuaded to invoke my discretion under section 439 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. 6. In the result, this petition is dismissed. However, I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move this court for bail again at later stages of the investigation not, at any rate, prior to 03/03/2008. The investigators shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks