IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2010 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1731 of 2010() --------------------------------- CMP.106/2010 of J.M.F.C.,KASARAGOD CRIME NO. 976/2009 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO 10 : ----------------------------------- AHAMMED KABIR, S/O.C.S.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 30 YEARS, PERUMBALA KADAVU ROAD, KASABA GRAMAM. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS : ------------------------------------ 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KASARAGOD POLICE STATION, 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD. BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. ------------------------ B.A. No. 1731 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.10 in Crime No.976/2009 of Kasaragod Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 459, 354, 323, 324, 120 B, 212, 364-A and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case, in a nut shell, is the following: Faizal Patel, brother of accused Nos.1 and 2, who operates his dealings from Middle East, is indulged in hawala money transactions in India. A sum of Rs.16,30,000/- was given by Faizal Patel to one Rafeeq, for the purpose of giving the same to Ahammed. Ahammed was directed to distribute the money to several hawala customers. Rafeeq handed over the amount to Ahammed. Ahammed alleged that on 5-11-2009, certain persons robbed the amount from him. However, the matter was not reported to the police, evidently since the transaction was a hawala money transaction. Ahammad reported the matter to Faizal Patel. Faizal Patel made his own enquiries. He arrived at B.A. No. 1731 of 2010 2 the conclusion that Ahammed was not stating the truth. Ahammed was apprehended by Faizal Patel’s people. Ahammed was directed to pay the amount to Faizal Patel. Ahammed expressed his inability to pay the amount. Another suggestion was made to Ahammed to compensate Faizal Patel by assigning immovable property. On 20-11-2009, immovable property belonging to the father in law of Ahammed was assigned to Najeemudin, who is none other than the husband of Faizal Patel’s wife’s sister. 4. The prosecution alleges that on further enquiry by Faizal Patel and his men, it was revealed that the amount of Rs.16,30,000/- was robbed from Ahammed by one Dawood, with the help of Rafeeq. Since Faizal Patel was convinced that Ahammed was innocent in the deal, the immovable property transferred in the name of Najeemudin was re-transferred to the father in law of Ahammed. On 30-12-2009, accused Nos.1 and 2, who are the brothers of Faizal Patel, with the help of their associates, totalling fifteen in number, abducted Dawood from his house, in a Maruti Swift car bearing registration No. KL 14 H 7000. They also attacked the brother and sister in law of B.A. No. 1731 of 2010 3 Dawood. At about 6.30 P.M. on 30-12-2009, three persons brought the dead body of Dawood to Century Hospital, Kasaragod. The case of the prosecution is that Dawood was brutally manhandled and murdered by the accused persons. 5. The petitioner was arrested on 05.01.2010. He is in judicial custody since then. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no reason why he should be detained further. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the Bail Application. 8. As per the order dated 08.03.2010 in Bail Application No. 760/2010 request for bail made by the petitioner was rejected. 9. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that Dawood was brutally murdered after abducting him. He was beaten up by iron rods and sticks. He submitted that the Post Mortem certificate reveals that Dawood died of bleeding from multiple blunt force injuries sustained by him. Forty ante mortem injuries were noted on the body of Dawood. He also submitted that there are enough materials to connect the accused persons with the offence. Accused No.10 was one among the group of persons B.A. No. 1731 of 2010 4 who abducted Dawood from the house of de facto complainant, who is the brother of Dawood. Accused No.10 was all through out in the gang during commission of the offence. 10. The investigation of the case is not over. Several incidents and facts are to be proved in the case. Several witnesses are to be examined and the investigating agency has to collect several materials to prove the guilt of the accused. All the accused persons were not arrested. I am of the view that if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. The petitioner is likely to make himself scarce. It is also likely that the petitioner may indulge in intimidating and influencing the witnesses. 11. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, the manner in which the crime was allegedly perpetrated and all other attendant circumstances, I do not think that bail can be granted to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the Bail application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln