IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2008 / 12TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 7881 of 2007() ----------------------------- CRIME 722/07 OF ERNAKUALM TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION PETITIONER : APPLICANT.ACCUSED NO.8 --------------------------------------- JIJO, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O P.K.GOPI, PATHRAMENIYIL HOUSE, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM VAKKANAL SRI.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL SRI.BIJIMON C.CHERIAN SRI.ARUL KUMAR.P SRI.LOWEL CHERIAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANTS ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. THE C.I. OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.K.SURESH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/01/2008, ALONG WITH BA.8119/07 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. Nos. 7881 C and 8119 B OF 2007 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2008 O R D E R These applications for regular bail are filed by the petitioners, who are accused Nos.8, 9 and 10 in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 120B and 302 IPC. The crux of the allegations against the petitioners is that they, along with the co-accused, were conspirators who on account of the prior animosity which the principal accused entertained against the deceased hatched a conspiracy to do away with the deceased armed with dangerous weapons. The conspirators allegedly proceeded to the house of the de facto complainant where the deceased was available. They went in two vehicles. The 8th accused was the driver of one of those vehicles - an autorikshaw. After locating the deceased in the house of the de facto complainant, the accused persons allegedly unleashed an attack on the victim with dangerous weapons. The de facto BA.7881 & 8119/07 : 2 : complainant, who tried to intervene, was also pushed aside. The deceased succumbed to injuries. The miscreants went from the scene of the crime in the two vehicles in which they had come. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners were arrested on 24.11.07. The alleged incident took place on 18.11.07. All other accused except accused Nos.5 and 11 have now been arrested. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. In the F.I.Statement the three petitioners herein are not named at all. Four accused persons are specifically named in the FIR and it is further alleged that there were two to three (some) other persons along with the named accused. The petitioners have been subsequently brought on the array of the accused without any valid reason. They may now be enlarged on bail, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. The learned counsel for the 8th accused in particular submits that the 8th accused is only the driver of a BA.7881 & 8119/07 : 3 : public carrier autorikshaw. Even the alleged fact that the miscreants had come in an autorikshaw and the miscreants had left the scene of the crime in that autorikshaw cannot expose the 8th accused to any complicity. Even allegedly he was only sitting in his autorikshaw when the attack on the victim took place, submits the learned counsel for the 8th accused. The fact that the miscreants had travelled in the public carrier driven by him may not expose the petitioner to further trauma of incarceration, submits the learned counsel for the 8th accused petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the 9th and 10th accused rely particularly on the fact that they are not named in the FIR and an attempt is now made to include several persons describing them to be “two to three persons who accompanied the named accused.” They may also be granted regular bail, it is prayed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that it is BA.7881 & 8119/07 : 4 : not a case where the only material collected is the account of the eye witness at the scene of the crime. There is evidence about a prior conspiracy between all the accused persons. A witness had gone to the place where the conspiracy took place. All the accused persons including the three petitioners were present at such scene of the conspiracy. It is after such conspiracy that the accused persons armed with weapons proceeded to the residence of the de facto complainant and later returned after the incident from the scene of the crime. The 8th accused was also present along with the other conspirators when the witness so came. There is nothing to conclude at the moment that the 8th accused has no complicity. 6. So far as accused Nos.9 and 10 are concerned, they had stood around the deceased to facilitate infliction of injuries on the deceased by the principal accused, it is submitted. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that BA.7881 & 8119/07 : 5 : considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the stage of investigation and the period of detention of the petitioners, they do not deserve to be enlarged on bail at this stage. 8. Having considered all the relevant inputs and after perusing the case diary, I am not persuaded to release the petitioners on bail at this early stage of investigation. 9. In the result, this petition is dismissed. However, I may hasten to observe that the petitioners shall be at liberty to move this court or the Sessions court for bail again at later stages of the investigation not, at any rate, prior to 16/01/2008. The investigators shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks