IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3608 of 2009 CRIME NO.220 OF 2009 OF MUNDAKAYAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS: ACCUSED NOS.1,2,4,5: ---------------------------------------- 1. JAYAPRAKASH @ JAYAN, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.KOCHUNANU, PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR POST OFFICE, KARINILAM KARA, ERUMELY NORTH VILLAGE. 2. TOM K.JOSEPH @ TOM, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, KANDATHIL HOUSE, CHETHIMATTAM BHAGOM, KIZHATHADIYOOR KARA, LALAM VILLAGE. 3. SANOJ @ SANOPPY, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.LOUIS, PARAPPURATHY HOUSE, THANNICHAPPATHALTOP BHAGOM, PULICKUNNU KARA, ERUMELY NORTH VILLAGE. 4. PRAVEEN, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.BABU, OLICKAL HOUSE, THALUNKAL ESTATE BHAGOM, KOOTTICKAL VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE SI OF POLICE, MUNDAKKAYAM POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 3608 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th July, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 in Crime No.220 of 2009 of Mundakayam Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 452, 365 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. One Anuja Roseline, who is an Australian citizen and whose mother is also an Australian citizen, came to India and started residence at Pampady in Kottayam District. Anuja Roseline's mother belongs to Pampady and she subsequently acquired citizenship of Australia. Anuja Roseline fell in love with her car driver Baiju, aged 36, and started residing with him. They entered into an agreement, which was registered before the Sub Registrar's Office. In the agreement itself it is stated that the marriage as per that agreement is invalid and that both of them know that it is invalid. B.A. NO. 3608 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 4. It would appear that Anuja Roseline's mother approached the police stating that her daughter was missing. Anuja Roseline was produced by the police before the Magistrate's Court. She stated before the learned Magistrate that she would like to go with Baiju. Learned Magistrate permitted Anuja Roseline to go with Baiju. 5. The prosecution case is that thereafter, the mother of Anuja Roseline, the 10th accused in this case, hired accused Nos.1 to 9, who are professional goondas, to get Anuja Roseline from the custody of Baiju. Accordingly the operation was done on 21.5.2009 and Anuja Roseline was abducted by them. Later, Anuja Roseline was taken to Australia by her mother. 6. Accused Nos.4 and 5 were arrested on 30.5.2009. Accused Nos.1 and 2 surrendered before the police on 2.6.2009. They are in judicial custody. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the Bail Application. It is submitted that all the accused persons are not arrested. The tenth accused is in Australia and she has to be brought to India. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that if the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would seriously affect the smooth conduct of the B.A. NO. 3608 OF 2009 :: 3 :: investigation. Some other accused persons are also to be arrested. Witnesses are to be questioned. The investigation is at the initial stage. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioners, the nature and gravity of the offence and the present stage of investigation, I do not think that the petitioners can be released on bail at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/