IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2010 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 760 of 2010 CRIME NO.976 OF 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: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA THORUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD POLICE STATION. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/03/2010, ALONGWITH B.A.NO.1083 OF 2010, THE COURT ON 08/03/2010 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NOS. 760 & 1083 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of March, 2010 O R D E R Bail Application Nos.760 of 2010 and 1083 of 2010 are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, respectively by accused Nos.10 and 11 (Ahammed Kabir and Najeemudin) in Crime No. 976 of 2009 of Kasaragod Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the accused persons 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 B.A. Nos.760 & 1083 OF 2010 :: 2 :: 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 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 (Petitioner in B.A. No.1083 of 2010), 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, B.A. Nos.760 & 1083 OF 2010 :: 3 :: 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 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. Accused No.10 was arrested on 5-1-2010 while accused No.11 was arrested on 6-1-2010. They were remanded to judicial custody. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that about two months are over since the arrest of the petitioners. There is no reason why the petitioners should be detained further. Advocate Sri. Sunny Mathew submitted that there is no material to connect accused No.10 with the offence. He submitted that even if version of the prosecution is accepted, the conspiracy was only to abduct Dawood. There was no conspiracy to commit murder of Dawood. B.A. Nos.760 & 1083 OF 2010 :: 4 :: There was no intention to murder him. No weapons were allegedly used by the accused. The counsel also submitted that if the intention of the accused was to murder him, they could have done so without any abduction. Advocate Sri.Rameshchander submitted that accused No.11 is running Shereef Travels, Kasaragod. Accused No. 11 had no role in the offence. He is innocent of the offence. He is only indulged in his business of Travel Agency and in that business, he had to provide air tickets to many persons. That by itself should not lead to the conclusion that he had indulged in any crime, if any, committed by any such person who travelled using the air ticket provided by the petitioner. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the Bail Applications. It is submitted that there is a racket in Kasaragod, dealing in hawala money transactions. They have their own laws. They make their own investigation if any “offence” in the hawala dealing is committed by anybody. They have their own investigating agency. They punish the “offenders” in their own way. The unwritten law among them is that anybody who gives any information to the police or any other authority about the hawala dealings, and B.A. Nos.760 & 1083 OF 2010 :: 5 :: anybody who acts in bad faith in hawala dealings, would be liable to punishment according to the “laws” of hawala people. They apprehend the offender, try him and punish him. 8. 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 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. As regards accused No.11, it is submitted that he was involved in the activities of Faizal Patel. He got assignment of immovable property from the father in law of Ahammed, as directed by Faizal Patel. Later, as directed by Faizal Patel, he re-transferred the property. Accused No.11 provided air tickets to the first accused and the third accused, a few days after the B.A. Nos.760 & 1083 OF 2010 :: 6 :: murder of Dawood. Accused No.11 participated in the conspiracy as well. 9. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that only accused Nos.1,4,5,6,10 and 11 were arrested. The other accused persons are absconding. 10. The offence under Section 364-A is punishable with death, or imprisonment for life and also fine. Therefore, I do not think that the submission made by Advocate Sri.Sunny Mathew that if at all the case of the prosecution is accepted, the conspiracy was only to abduct Dawood, has any relevance. 11. 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 petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. The petitioners are likely to make B.A. Nos.760 & 1083 OF 2010 :: 7 :: themselves scarce. It is also likely that the petitioners may indulge in intimidating and influencing the witnesses. The alleged activities of hawala racket is to be taken note of in this context. At this stage, prima facie, I am not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioners that there are no materials to connect them with the offence. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Applications are dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/