IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 2086 of 2008() ----------------------------- SC.555/2003 of ADDL.D.C.(SPL.COURT FOR TRIAL FOR MARADU CASES)KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONERS/A6,8,10,14,18,20,26,35,45,58,59,72,73, ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MANAF P.P., S/O. IBRAHIM, PUTHIYAPURAYIL VEEDU, MARAD (A6). 2. ALI AKBAR @ BICHUMON, S/O. ALI, KUNNATHUPARAMBU VEEDU, BEYPORE(A8). 3. C.P. RAFEEQUE, S/O. MOIDEENKOYA, CHERUPURACKAL VEEDU, BEYPORE(A10). 4. SAIDALAVI, S/O. ABDUL KADER, PAREECHINTAKATH VEEDU, MARAD (A14). 5. AKBAR, S/O. ABDURAHIMAN, KINATTINGALAKATH VEEDU, MARAD (A18). 6. HARSHAD, S/O. AHAMMEDKOYA, THEKKEPURATH VEEDU, MARAD (A20). 7. K.P. ABDUL MAJEED @ MAJEED, S/O. YUSAF, KUNNATHPARAMBA VEEDU, BEYPORE (A26). 8. NAJMUDEEN @ SIBIYAN, S/O. HASSAN, ABOOBAKERAKATH VEEDU, MARAD (A35). 9. JAISAL T.P., S/O. RAZAK, THEKKPURATH VEEDU, MARAD (A45). 10. ASKAR, S/O. ABDURAHIMAN, KINATTINGALAKATHU VEEDU, MARAD (A58). 11. NOUSHAD, S/O. MAMMEDKOYA, SEEMAMUNTAKATH VEEDU, MARAD (A59). 12. MUNEER, S/O. ABDULLA, SEEMAMUNTAKATH VEEDU, MARAD (A72). 13. MUJEEB RAHMAN, S/O. HAMZA, ARAYANVEETTIL VEEDU, MARAD(A73). 14. SHAFI, S/O. ABDULLA, SEEMAMUNTAKATH VEEDU, MARAD (A74). 15. SHUKUR, S/O. MAMMEDKOYA, PUTHANPEEDIYEKKAL VEEDU, MARAD (A75). 16. FARROK, S/O. ABDURAHIMAN, KINATTINGALAKATHU VEEDU, MARAD (A115). BY ADV. SRI.G.JANARDHANA KURUP (SR.) SRI.P.K.VARGHESE SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR SRI.E.C.BINEESH SRI.JOHN K.GEORGE RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY D.G.P. SRI. P.G. THAMBI THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, ALONG WITH BA NO. 2087 OF 2008 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.Nos. 2086, 2087, 2088 & 2089 & 2090 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008 O R D E R The petitioners in these applications are accused in S.C.No.555 of 2003 pending before the Special Addl. Sessions Court, (Maradu cases) Kozhikode. They have been remaining in custody for the past more than 4 years. The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that some of the co-accused have already been granted regular bail by this Court by common order dt. 23.1.2008 in B.A.Nos. 26, 27, 29, 35 and 65 of 2008 and common order dt. 19.12.2007 in B.A. 7160 and 7162 of 2007. The petitioners herein may also now be granted regular bail subject to appropriate terms and conditions, prays the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The trial in that case is not over yet. Evidence of both sides stand closed and the arguments had commenced on 1.11.2007. This Court has been monitoring the progress of the B.A.Nos. 2086/08 & connected cases 2 case and weekly reports are being received from the learned Addl. Sessions Court about the progress made in the case. It is expected that the arguments shall be completed of all the accused by 10.4.2008. The petitioners, in these circumstances, pray that they may also be granted regular bail, subject to appropriate terms and conditions. They do, of course, further contend that the conditions imposed by the orders shown above are too onerous and the conditions may be modified and relaxed. 3. The learned D.G.P. on behalf of the State submits that the State has no objection against grant of bail to the petitioners herein, the co-accused having already been granted regular bail and no challenge having been raised against such orders. 4. I am satisfied that the petitioners can also be granted regular bail. I do note that inspite of the efforts taken by this Court a more expeditious disposal cannot be achieved and the final disposal does appear to be quite far of even now. Subject to identical conditions as were imposed on the co-accused, who have already been directed to be released as per the orders referred above, I am satisfied that the B.A.Nos. 2086/08 & connected cases 3 petitioners herein can also be released on bail. This order must be read in continuation of the two common orders referred above and I am not hence adverting to facts in any greater detail in this order. 5. These petitions are accordingly allowed. The petitioners shall be released on bail on the following terms and conditions: (i) They shall execute bonds for Rs.2 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs only) each with three solvent sureties, of which one must be a blood relative of the petitioners and the remaining, two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge. (ii) The petitioners shall reside at a place to be specified by them even before they are released on bail, within 3 Kms. of the of the Court building of the learned Special Judge, until the judgment is pronounced finally. (iii) At least one of the sureties shall be present with the accused at all times after their release. The sureties or any one of them shall bring the accused to the court on every date of posting and take them from the court to the specified place of residence after the court adjourns. B.A.Nos. 2086/08 & connected cases 4 (iv) The petitioners shall not travel to any other place except from court to the place of residence and from the place of residence to the court accompanied by the sureties or any one of them. (v) They shall not meet, contact or interact with any one other than their counsel or close relatives i.e., parents, spouses, children or siblings or any other person the Special Judge may approve on their request. A statement shall be filed by the petitioners of all such persons whom they want to meet and interact with while they are on bail as per this order, prior to their release, which shall be considered and approved by the learned Special Judge. (vi) The petitioners and their sureties shall undertake that the petitioners shall be present before court on all dates of posting. They shall further undertake that if for any reason – justifiable or otherwise, they are not present before court to enable the court to proceed with the arguments, hearing on the question of sentence or delivery of judgment, such steps or any other steps which are to be taken in the case can be undertaken without their presence exempting them from their personal appearance. An affidavit shall be filed by the B.A.Nos. 2086/08 & connected cases 5 petitioners. In such affidavit, they shall undertake that in the unlikely event of their absence from court for any reason justifiable or otherwise, the court can proceed with the trial in their absence while simultaneously initiating coercive processes against them. It is directed that the court shall be at liberty to proceed hereafter assuming that the petitioners are present before court on all dates till the stage of final pronouncement of the judgment/sentence. Such an extra ordinary direction appears to be necessary in the interests of justice and for the orderly further progress of the case without interruption and also to allay the apprehensions aired by the learned D.G.P. (vii) The State shall be at liberty to place police surveillance for the petitioners while they are on bail. The State has the duty to ensure that their movements are monitored and any attempt to commit breach of the obligations under this order is not permitted to take place. Alertly the State has to ensure that these conditions are complied with. (viii) Breach of conditions, if any, shall be promptly reported by the police to the learned Special Judge and prompt action shall be taken by the learned Special Judge. For such action the learned Special B.A.Nos. 2086/08 & connected cases 6 Judge shall assume that the conditions have been imposed and the bail has been granted by the learned Special Judge himself. (ix) For the State to make necessary arrangements regarding surveillance etc., it is directed that the petitioners shall not be released from custody on the strength of this order prior to 15.4.2008. In the meantime, they shall file statements/ undertakings before the learned Special Judge with a copy to the Prosecutor in charge. The learned Special Judge shall consider whether the conditions have been strictly complied with and then only direct their release from custody on or after 15.4.2008. (x) It is clarified that condition No.5 shall not fetter the option of the accused persons to reside together in any place under the common roof or to interact with the co-accused. (R. BASANT) Judge tm