IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2008 / 25TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 159 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 317/06 OF VATTIYOORKAVU POLICE STATION CMP.8072/2007 of J.M.F.C.-II,NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER/8TH ACCUSED --------------------------------------- ABHILASH, S/O.CHANDRAN NAIR, VILAYIL PUTHEN VEEDU, NILAMI, ENIKARA DESOM, KARAKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2008, ALONG WITH BA NO. 160 OF 2008 BA NO. 161 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 159, 160 & 161 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of January, 2008 O R D E R These applications by the common petitioner are for regular bail. The petitioner remains in custody from 27.11.2007. He is accused in three crimes. The allegation in Crime No.686 of 2007 of Medical College Police Station, from which B.A. 160 of 2008 arises, is that the petitioner, along with others, was found present in a vehicle which was intercepted by the police on suspicion. The vehicle was found to contain dangerous arms and explosive substances. The detection took place on 27.11.2007. Three country bombs, iron pipes etc. were available in the car. He, along with the co-accused, was arrested. He continues in custody from that date in that crime. 2. While the petitioner was continuing in custody, the petitioner was included in the array of two other cases, in which investigation was pending. In Crime No. 317 of 2006 of Vattiyoorkavu Police Station, from which B.A. 159 of 2008 B.A.No. 159, 160 & 161 of 2008 2 arises, it is alleged that the petitioner was one of those who abducted the defacto complainant with the intention of compelling him to sign documents to his prejudice and disadvantage at the instance of the principal accused in that case. The incident in that case took place on 22.11.2007. The petitioner is not named as an accused in the F.I.R. It is in the course of investigation that the petitioner has been brought on the array of accused in that case. The arrest of the petitioner in that crime has been recorded w.e.f. 5.12.2007. The petitioner continues in custody in that crime from 5.12.2007. 3. The petitioner has been shown as arrested in Crime No.328 of 2006 of Vattiyoorkavu Police Station, from which B.A.No. 161 of 2008 arises. The allegation in that crime is that the petitioner and others, who had acted at the behest of the first accused in Crime No.317 of 2006 to commit the said crime, were not remunerated as agreed upon and on account of animosity they abducted the first accused in Crime 317 of 2006 on the same day i.e. 22.11.2007. In that crime also the petitioner has not been named as an accused in the B.A.No. 159, 160 & 161 of 2008 3 F.I.R. In the course of investigation his complicity was revealed and he was shown as an accused. His arrest was recorded in that crime w.e.f. 5.12.2007. Thus the petitioner continues in custody from 27.11.2007. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. He is not involved in any of these three crimes. He has been unnecessarily arrested and detained. At any rate, the petitioner may now be enlarged on bail, he having remained in custody from 27.11.2007. 5. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the petitioner and the co-accused have criminal antecedents. A thorough investigation is to be conducted. Investigation is not complete yet. The petitioner may not be enlarged on bail at this early stage of investigation. He submits that the materials collected in all the three crimes clearly show the involvement of the petitioner in all the three crimes. The mere fact that the petitioner has not by name shown as accused in the F.I.R. may not be reckoned as relevant or crucial in B.A.No. 159, 160 & 161 of 2008 4 the facts and circumstances of this case. The Investigators, in a serious crime like this, must be given sufficient time to complete the investigation, I am satisfied. 6. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition of the learned Prosecutor. I am satisfied that the Investigators deserve to be granted some further time to complete the investigation. 4. These applications are, in these circumstance, dismissed. But I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move this court or the courts below for bail again at a later stage of the investigation, not at any rate, prior to 25.1.2008. The Investigators shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation. (R. BASANT) Judge tm