IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2009 / 9TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 322 of 2009() ---------------------------- (CRIME NO.356/2008 OF EDAKKAD POLICE STATION) PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- A.MOHAMMED NAWAS, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.ABURAHIMAN, PAINTER,RAHMANIYA NIVAS, MARAKARKANDY, KANNUR - 17. BY ADV. SRI.C.KHALID SRI.T.P.SAJID RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANTS --------------------------- 1. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, EDAKKAD POLICE STATION, EDAKKAD, KANNUR. 2. STATE, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION ( SRI. V.G.GOVINDAN NAIR). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.K.SURESH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ALONG WITH B.A.NO. 271 OF 2009 ON 29/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl. Nos. 322 & 271 of 2009 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2009. ORDER These petitions are for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 3, read with 13(2), 16, 18, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act as well as under Sections 120B, 121, 121A and 124A of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, a case was registered suo motu by the Sub Inspector of Police against first accused on getting some relevant information against him regarding the commission of certain offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Thereafter, on investigation, it is revealed that 22 persons are involved in the offence in various ways. Four persons (accused 7, 8, 9 and 10) died in an encounter in Kashmir and 15th accused escaped and came to Hyderabad and from there to Kerala. He was sheltered in Kerala and was arrested. 3. Petitioner in B.A.No.271/09 is accused no.6 and petitioner in B.A.no.332/09 is accused no.14. Accused no. 14 allegedly took out a building on rent in which he was engaging himself in activities supporting a terrorist organisation. Meetings were held in that building and classes are also taken to incite people to join terrorist organisation and work against India. It is also revealed that the wife of 15th accused was brought to Kerala and she was given shelter in the house of 14th accused for a day. [B.A.Nos.322 & 271/09 2 It is also the case of prosecution that the five persons, who were involved in the encounter in Kashmir were recruited on 14.8.2008 in a meeting held in the building taken on rent out by 14th accused. Therefore, as per the investigation so far detected, petitioners are engaged in criminal conspiracy to commit various offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. 4. According to prosecution, A6 along with accused nos.2 and 14 brought A7 (who later died in an encounter in Kashmir) to join the classes at Neerchal. There is ample evidence against 6th accused. Diaries were seized and statements of witnesses were recorded. The statements of parents of 7th accused are recorded which will reveal connection of 6th accused with terrorist activities. 5. Learned counsel for petitioners have submitted that both the accused are innocent of the allegations made and they have absolutely no connection with any banned terrorist group. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that 14th accused is member of a poor Muslim family and he is a painter by profession. He has a family which depends upon him. His mother and the wife have filed an affidavit stating that he has absolutely no connection with any terrorist movement and they are prepared to stand as sureties and they will produce A14 at any place on any day as directed. It is also submitted that no materials are available with the prosecution to connect A14 with any crime. 6. All what is gathered is some custodial confession, which will not amount to evidence and no overt act is allegedly committed by A14, which will attract any of the offences under [B.A.Nos.322 & 271/09 3 the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, it is submitted. A14 is prepared to abide by any condition as imposed by this Court. No further detention would be required, it is submitted. He has already suffered 81 days custody in prison and unless he is released on bail, it will not be possible to defend himself properly. For these reasons, he requests for bail. 7. These petitions are strongly opposed. The learned Director General of Prosecution submitted that even security of this nation will be in danger if petitioners are released on bail, pending investigation into a crime of this nature. Several materials are collected to connect accused with the crime and it is not correct to say that there is absolutely no evidence against them, except the custodial confession. Several witnesses are questioned as revealed from the case diary itself and even statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C are taken. 8. It has come out in evidence that the wife of 15th accused, who had escaped from an encounter in Kashmir was given shelter in the house of A14 for a day and witnesses have spoken to this effect (vide CW77). There is also evidence to show that classes were taken to incite people to join terrorist movement and support terrorist activities from the building rented out to A14. If, at this stage of investigation, petitioners are released on bail, it will adversely affect the investigation and also public interest at large, it is submitted. 9. Learned Director General of Prosecution also pointed out that every day more and more informations are received by the police. Phone call details are procured which will show that the accused in this case have close connection with the main [B.A.Nos.322 & 271/09 4 offenders in this case and also those who have died in the encounter in Kashmir and those, who are involved in terrorist activities. If petitioners are granted bail it will affect even the national security. It is also submitted that charge-sheet is filed. 10. In the light of the rival contentions made, I have perused the case diary in detail. On going through the case diary, I am prima facie satisfied of the submissions made by learned Public Prosecutor. I am not going into minute details and I am cautiously avoiding detailed discussions also, since charge- sheet is already laid. If petitioners are innocent as they would claim, they can move appropriate court for appropriate relief including discharge. On the facts and circumstances of the case in the large interest of public, I am satisfied that it is not fit to grant bail to petitioners since they are likely to abscond, in which event the trial will be protracted. 11. It is also evident from the case diary that several witnesses have spoken against petitioners and it is likely that petitioners will make attempts to influence or intimidate them and tamper with evidence. Therefore, it is not fit and proper to grant bail to petitioners at this stage. Petitioners are also at liberty to apply for bail before trial court and depending upon the stage of the case, the bail application filed, if any, will be disposed of on merit untrammelled by any of the observations contained in this order. Petitions are dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.