IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD OCTOBER 2009 / 1ST KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5985 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CRIME NO. 883/2009 OF KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- CHARLEY, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, CHIRAYATHU HOUSE, ANCHERRI MURI, OLLUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION, NOTICE TO WHOM MAY BE SERVED ON PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. SRI. TEKCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/10/2009 ALONG WITH BA NO. 6061 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. Nos.5985 & 6061 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2009 O R D E R B.A. No.5985 of 2009 is filed by Charly,accused No.7 in Crime No.883/2009 of Karunagappally Police Station while B.A. No.6061 of 2009 is filed by Saith Alavi, accused No.14 therein. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 395, 120 B, 109 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is the following: The de facto complainant is employed in a jwellery in Thrissur. The employer of the de facto complainant used to supply large quantity of jwellery items to jwelleries in Karunagappally and nearby places. The de facto complainant used to supply the jwellery items at Karunagappally as directed by his employer. The accused persons were aware of the transporting of jewellery from Thrissur to Karunagappally twice in a week. They plotted an idea of robbing the jewellery. They made preparations for the same. Various accused persons were given specific duties at various stages of the commission of the offence. The allegation is that the accused persons had even gone to Karunagappally on an earlier occasion to chart out the B.A. Nos.5985 & 6061/2009 2 plan in a very effective and flawless manner. On 29/8/2009, the de facto complainant went to Karunagappally from Thrissur in Island Express train. He reached Karunagappally at 2.15 P.M.. Three of the accused persons reached near him on a motor bike and attacked him with sword. The de facto complainant sustained injuries. The bag containing 6.75 Kgs of golden jewellery was snatched from the de facto complainant. The aforesaid three persons immediately left the place. The bag containing jewellery items was transferred to some other accused who were travelling in a car. They were waiting in the car at the specified place. After receiving the bag, they left the place. Further allegation is that head of the team is one Rinto, whose orders nobody dared to challenge. Rinto gave share of profits to the other accused persons. Rinto sold the jewellery to various persons. He also gave small quantities of jewellery to some of the accused persons as well. Accused No.14 is working in Bangalore. His assistance was sought for selling a part of the jewellery items to a Sait at Bangalore. Accused No.14 had criminal antecedents. He was being contacted by the other accused persons. 4. Accused No.7 was arrested on 10/9/2009 while B.A. Nos.5985 & 6061/2009 3 accused No.14 was arrested on 20/9/2009. They are in judicial custody. 5. The offence alleged is very grave. The offence was committed after making preparations and plans. Several persons are involved in the offence. The quantity of gold involved is 6.75Kgs worth Rs.91 lakhs. The investigation is in progress. If the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the smooth and proper investigation of the case. It is also most likely, as rightly pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, that the petitioners may indulge in activities to tamper with the evidence and to influence and intimidate the witnesses. The kingpin of the offence, namely, Rinto is not arrested so far. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case mentioned above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners, at this stage. These Bail Applications are accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm