IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2011 / 25TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 7843 of 2011 CRIME NO.800 OF 2011 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.4 ------------------------------------------ ABY PAUL, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.PAULOSE, THANATTUKUZHY VEEDU, MUDAKUZHA PANCHAYATH, VENGOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE S.I.OF POLICE, MUSEUM POLICE STATION. STATE PROSECUTOR SRI.ASAF ALI PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.K.SURESH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/10/2011, ALONGWITH B.A.NO.8243 IF 2011, THE COURT ON 17/10/2011 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NOS.7843 & 8243 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of October, 2011 O R D E R B.A.No.7843 of 2011 is filed by accused No.4 in Crime No.800 of 2011 of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The petitioner in B.A.No.8243 of 2011 is accused No.1 in that crime. These Bail Applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 120B, 201, 419, 511 of 420, 468, 469 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66A(b) and 66D of the Information Technology Act. 3. The prosecution case is the following: The accused persons conspired together at Trivandrum Club, Vazhuthakkad on 26.7.2011 with an intention to extract money from the Honourable Minister for Electricity. On the next day, i.e. on 27.7.2011 at 6 P.M., accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 went to the official residence of the BAIL APPL. NOS.7843 & 8243 OF 2011 :: 2 :: Minister. The meeting with the Minister was arranged by one Seshadrinath Sarma. Accused No.2 (Satheesh Keezhiyapad) impersonated himself as one Nandakumar. While talking with the Minister, the images and voices were recorded with a recording camera kept concealed in the wrist watch. Later, the audio recording was manipulated in such a way to make it appear that the Minister demanded a commission at 8% for the supply of goods for the Kerala State Electricity Board. Using this forged audio recording, the accused attempted to blackmail the Minister demanding a sum of Rupees Twenty five lakhs. 4. The case was registered on the basis of a petition submitted by the President of All Kerala Anti Corruption and Human Rights Protection Council, Palakkad (hereinafter referred to as 'the Council'). In the petition, the following details, inter alia, were furnished. On 2.8.2011, accused No.3 (Raveendran Nair) met the President of the Council and informed him that Sri.Aryadan Muhamed, the Honourable Minister for Electricity, demanded 8% commission when he had a talk with the representative of a Canadian company on 27.7.2011. The BAIL APPL. NOS.7843 & 8243 OF 2011 :: 3 :: President of the Council requested accused No.3 to pass on the information by e-mail. The preliminary points were sent by e-mail. The President of the Council requested to supply further details. Accordingly, on 3.8.2011, accused No.3 met the President of the Council and handed over a Compact Disk. The name of the Canadian company and the persons who participated in the meeting with the Minister were also furnished to the President of the Council. The President of the Council stated that more details were required for intervening in the matter. He entertained a doubt about the veracity of the information given to him, since he was informed that the informers were prepared to have a settlement if the persons connected with the Minister were prepared to do so. To make the President of the Council believe about the story, he was informed that before the accused met the Minister, the film actor Jagadeesh and people of a television channel were present at the official residence of the Minister and the accused got the interview with the Minister only after Jagadeesh had the interview with the Minister. The President of the Council intimated these details to the Director General of Police in the letter dated 4th August, 2011. BAIL APPL. NOS.7843 & 8243 OF 2011 :: 4 :: 5. During investigation of the crime, accused Nos.1 and 4 were arrested on 29.8.2011. Accused No.3 was also arrested. However, accused No.2 was not arrested. 6. The investigation is in progress. The allegations levelled against the accused are very grave in nature. The investigation revealed that the accused persons purchased a “watch camera” for the particular purpose. Investigation also revealed that the offence was committed by the accused only to extract money from the Minister. If the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case, particularly since accused No.2 is not arrested so far. The learned State Prosecutor submitted that the “watch camera” is to be seized and several materials are to be collected during investigation. 7. I am of the view that it is not proper to release the petitioners on bail at this stage. If they are released on bail, there is every likelihood of the witnesses being intimidated or BAIL APPL. NOS.7843 & 8243 OF 2011 :: 5 :: influenced by the accused. It is also likely that the petitioners may tamper with the evidence. For the aforesaid reasons, these Bail Applications are dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/