IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 135 of 2008() ---------------------------- CMP.4454/2007 of J.M.F.C.,MALAPPURAM CRIME NO.393/07 OF VENGARA POLICE STATION .................... : PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 ---------------------------------------- PRAKASH, S/O. B.GANAPATHY (LATE) KUMBASI VILLAGE, KUNTHAPURAM, UDUPPI. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE VENGARA POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.135 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of January, 2008 ORDER Application for regular bail. Petitioner is the 2nd accused. One Razack was found missing from 5.11.07. F.I.R was registered under the caption `man missing' on 08.11.07. Partners, relatives etc. of the said Razack started getting anonymous telephone calls demanding a huge sum or ransom. On the basis of the last telephone call received, the police party traced the call from some place in Karnataka. The police party reached there. The detenu, along with accused 1 to 3 who were keeping him under detention were taken into custody. The deteneu was rescued. The petitioner along with accused 1 and 3 was arrested. He continues in custody from 05.12.07. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. He has nothing to do with the decision to detain the said Razack nor has he any responsibility in the movement of the said Razack to the place where he was found. According to the petitioner, his assignment was innocuous. He being the employee of the 5th accused was only asked to provide food to the detenu as and when required. The petitioner has been unnecessarily detained now. He has been languishing in prison from 05.12.07. He may now be enlarged on bail, it is prayed. B.A.No.135 of 2008 2 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the mystery of the crime has not been resolved yet. The information now received is that a person who was using the satellite telephone was controlling the operation. The detenu was ultimately traced under circumstances in which the petitioner along with co-accused was restraining and detaining him. Investigation is not complete. At this stage, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail. Release of the petitioner would hamper the smooth course of investigation, submits the learned Public Prosecutor . 3. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am in total agreement with the learned Public Prosecutor that at this stage when the mystery of the crime has not been resolved completely, it is too early to release the petitioner on bail. 4. This application for regular bail is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the observation that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move this Court for bail again at a later stage of the investigation - not, at any rate, prior to 28.01.08. The investigator must in the meantime make every endeavour to complete the investigation. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-