IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 26TH BHADRA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 5360 of 2010() ---------------------- CRIME NO. 704 OF 2010 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.9 ---------------------- DR. RANEEF, AGED 39 S/O. ABDUL KAREEM, 4/462.K, NEAR CRESCENT SCHOOL, THOTTUMUGHAM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI 461 SRI.R.ANIL SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX SRI.SHYAM ARAVIND SRI.T.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTIONS SRI. P.N. SUKUMARAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/09/2010, THE COURT ON 17/09/2010 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. Ramkumar, J. ................................................ B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 ................................................ Dated: 17th September, 2010 Order In this petition filed under Secs. 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who is the 9th accused in Crime No. 704 of 2010 of Muvattupuzha Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 120 B, 323, 324, 326. 341, 427, 506 (ii), 307, 153 (A), 201, 202 and 212 read with Section 149 I.P.C., Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Sec. 15 read with Sections 16 , 18 , 18 (b), 19 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 13-7-2010. 2. The occurrence forming the subject matter of the above crime took place soon after 8 a.m. on 4-7-2010 when seven assailants who came in a Maruti Omni Van assaulted a B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:2:- Professor of Newman College, Thodupuzha by name T.J. Joseph and chopped off his right palm from the vicinity of his house at Hostelpadi, Moovattupuzha. while he was returning home after attending the Sunday holy mass . The role attributed to the petitioner (A9) is that he treated one of the injured assailants (A37) by suturing his wound on the back after applying local anesthesia from the house of A8 at Aluva. 3. I heard Adv. Sri. B. Raman Pillai, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. P.N. Sukumaran, the learned Addl. Director General of Prosecution. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made the following submissions before me in support of his request for bail:- The petitioner had absolutely no knowledge about or any role in the occurrence resulting in the assault on the Professor. The only overt act , apart from the allegation of criminal conspiracy, alleged against the petitioner is that he had sutured the wound of A37 who is alleged to have sustained an injury during the course of assaulting Professor Joseph and that the B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:3:- petitioner omitted to inform the police about the said accused or about the alleged conspiracy . The above overt act even if proved may attract only offences punishable under Sections 201 or 202 I.P.C. which are bailable offences. eventhough the petitioner was taken into custody even before 13-7-2010 his formal arrest was recorded only on 13-7-2010. However, his police custody subsequently was obtained only on 20-7-2007 and the remand application filed on 22-7-2010 while producing the petitioner back before the Magistrate will clearly show that the petitioner could not furnish any information to the police . Applications for bail filed by the petitioner before J.F.C.M. Muvattupuzha as Crl.M.P. 785 of 2010, before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam as Crl.M.C. 1282 of 2010 and before this Court as B.A. 4901 of 2010 were dismissed by the respective courts observing inter alia since the main offenders are yet to be apprehended, it may not be proper to release the petitioner on bail. Subsequently, more accused persons have been arrested but no more incriminating information against the petitioner has been elicited or collected. The petitioner is a Dental Surgeon hailing from a respectable family in Aluva. His father Abdul Kareem was a doctor loved and respected by all. Dr. Abdul Kareem died in the year 1997 while working as the Civil Surgeon in the Government Hospital, Perumbavoor. Petitioner's elder sister is a post-graduate in Zoology and younger sister is a law graduate Both are well settled in life. After completing his B.D.S. in the year 1992 the B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:4:- petitioner was conducting a dental clinic at N.Paravur. In the year 2001 the petitioner started Al-Ameen Multi Specialty Dental Hospital at Aluva . Five other doctors including the petitioner's wife who is also a Dental Surgeon are working in the said Hospital. The petitioner is having a son and a daughter aged 9 years and 5 respectively. Petitioner shifted his residence from N. Paravur to Aluva in the year 2006. As a doctor the petitioner is having very good reputation and is loved by all due to the services rendered by him to the poor and the needy. In the remand report pertaining to the petitioner it is alleged that one of the assailants of Prof. T.J. Joseph sustained an injury during the course of the assault on the Professor and pursuant to the pre- arranged plan to the effect that the petitioner would render medical aid to the injured, the wounded assailant was brought to the house of A8 (Abdul Salam) at Aluva and the petitioner was brought from his hospital to the house of A8 by A5 who is a leader of Popular Front of India (PFI) and after his treatment the petitioner was taken back to the hospital . If as a matter of fact there was a pre-arranged plan as per which the petitioner had volunteered to offer his services as a medical practitioner to give medical aid to any of the assailants in case he was wounded in the “operation maiming”, then the petitioner would have made himself available with full preparations in or around Muvattupuzha where the Professor was targeted for attack. Instead, the prosecution case is that the wounded B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:5:- assailant was brought 45 kms. away to Aluva where the petitioner is employed and he was taken from his hospital to a nearby house. In fact while the petitioner was in custody the investigating officer (Assistant Superintendent of Police, Aluva) as well as the Senior Police Officers who were supervising the investigation had compelled the petitioner to become an approver by making a confession before a Magistrate of facts tutored by the officers implicating the petitioner as a conspirator. Since those facts were false to the knowledge of the petitioner , he declined to accept the proposal. Consequently, a search was conducted at his hospital and his residence by the A.S.P., Aluva and C.Ds, Books, leaflets, telephone directory, election identity card and pan card etc. were seized. Some of the leaflets and CDs indicate that the petitioner is a person associated with the Popular Front of India and he was assigned the responsibility of the medical wing in connection with the freedom parade which was proposed to be organized by the P.F.I. in Aluva on 15-8- 2010. If the petitioner, being a doctor was selected as the head of the medical committee of the Popular Front of India with which he was associated and which is not a banned organization, that can hardly constitute conspiracy. Based on the above search and seizure, Crime No. 1965 of 2010 of Aluva Police Station was registered on 19-7-2010 for offences punishable under Sections 124 A and 153 A I.P.C. against the petitioner for the possession of the Book titled “Jihad” . It is the B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:6:- Malayalam translation of the book titled “Al Jihadu Fil Islam” written in Urudu in the year 1927 by Sri. Abul A Ale Maodoodi . The said book in Urudu has been in circulation in India and all over the world for the past 83 years . The Malayalam translation of the said book by Sri. K.T. Hussain under the title “Jihad” was first published in the year 2004 and its second Edition was published in the year 2007. At no point of time was the said book banned or prohibited . It was by segregating three sentences out of context from the said book consisting of 513 pages that the above case was registered. The petitioner has been in custody now for 65 days for allegedly having given medical aid to an injured person without knowing his identity or involvement. 5. The learned Addl. Director General of Prosecution made the following submissions before me vehemently opposing the request for bail:- The petitioner (A9) was taken from his hospital by A5 and A17 to the house of A8 at Aluva in a Maruti Swift Car. A14 and A37 were in the house of A8. A 37 had an injury on his back. The petitioner sutured the wound after applying local anesthesia . A18 then took the petitioner back to his hospital in a Tata Sumo Car . On account of the treatment given by the petitioner A37 was able to escape his apprehension by the police. The petitioner is an active worker B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:7:- of the P.F.I./N.D.F. for the last seven years and was in-charge of the medical wing of the organization. The documents seized from his car at the time of his arrest on 13-7-2010 shows that he was entrusted with the charge of giving first aid to the members of the P.F.I. freedom parade scheduled to be held on 15-8-2010 at Aluva. Another document seized shows that he was in charge of the medical wing in the “Vichara Theeram” programme held at Aluva Manappuram on 10-5- 2010 and 11-5-2010 by the P.F.I. . On 4-7-2010 after the brutal attack on Professor Joseph the petitioner who is a dental surgeon had unauthorisedly given treatment to A37 who got injured in the course of the occurrence at the hands of Midhun, Son of the Professor while trying to save his father. The petitioner was directed to the house of A8 by N.K. Nasar (A5) over mobile phone. The call details have been decoded from mobile phone connection 97460 26660 seized from the petitioner at the time of his arrest. By the illegal act of giving treatment to A37 the petitioner has caused disappearance of valuable evidence and has intentionally omitted to give information regarding the offence to the police. He also did not maintain any case sheet in this regard to reveal the history of the wound sustained by the patient . He did not record the name and address of the patient whom he had treated . A5 had contacted the B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:8:- petitioner and A8 several times on the date of occurrence using the mobile connection given by A7 (Kamarudheen) . Petitioner had prior knowledge about the occurrence and is also involved in the conspiracy which took place at different places and times. The activity of the accused persons in this case was like a terrorist activity and the group was having its own commanders and law. All the accused persons are either members or office bearers of the P.F.I. or the S.D.P.I. (Social Democratic Party of India). The association of the petitioner with the P.F.I. is confirmed by the records seized from his house, hospital and car. The petitioner was actually giving medical aid to the wounded accused (A37) in pursuance of a previous plan that if and when any of the assailants got injured in the “ operation maiming” of Professor Joseph , then then immediate medical succor would be given by the petitioner and his team . The petitioner was clandestinely extending medical aid to A37 even beyond his functional capabilities as a Dentist . Besides seditious CDs, a copy of the offending question paper prepared by Professor Joseph was seized from the petitioner's car and residence. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage when a good majority of the accused persons are still at large, it will adversely affect the investigation and the petitioner may make himself scarce and B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:9:- flee from justice. 6. After hearing both sides at length, I am of the view that having regard to the specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner, the duration of his judicial custody and the investigation thus far conducted, the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner outweigh those advanced on the side of the prosecution. Admittedly the seven assailants who came into Maruti Omni Van at about 8 a.m. on 4-7-2010 in the vicinity of the residence of Professor Joseph are A14, A27, A28 , A37, A49, A50 and A51. They are the persons who made the murderous assault on the Professor whose right palm was chopped off in the operation. The petitioner herein who is a dental surgeon and who is well established in his profession and having his own multi specialty hospital at Aluva was nowhere near the place of occurrence. The specific overt act attributed to the petitioner is that on being asked to render medical aid to an injured person , he was taken from his hospital to a nearby house where the injured person was found and the petitioner sutured the wound on the back of the injured person under local anesthesia and dressed the wound and thereafter the petitioner was taken back to his hospital. The prosecution seeks to rope in the petitioner with the main part of the occurrence by alleging that he was a B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:10:- member of the criminal conspiracy to either assassinate or maim the Professor. Even if the petitioner was associating himself with the P.F.I. or with the S.D.P.I. both of which are Muslim organisations which have not been banned, that by itself cannot lead one to the conclusion that the petitioner was one among those who hatched the criminal conspiracy to mount the murderous attack on the Professor. The complaint of the petitioner that on his refusal to oblige the A.S.P. to become an approver by confessing that he was a conspirator , the police conducted a raid at his residence and hospital to come out with allegedly incriminating CDs , leaflets etc. cannot be overlooked . If all that the petitioner did was to attend to an injured person by giving him medical aid, true to the Hippocratic oath taken by him, that by itself does not suggest that he was privy to the earlier occurrence in which the Professor was assaulted. Even if it could be said that the above act of the petitioner treating one of the injured/accused was with the knowledge that the injured had committed the offence of causing grievous hurt, it may, at best, amount to an offence punishable either under Sec. 201 or under Sec. 202 I.P.C. both of which are bailable offences. 65 days of pre-trial incarceration of a dental surgeon whom the law presumes to be innocent B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:11:- until proved otherwise after trial , is long enough . I do not think that the continued detention of the petitioner is warranted and that his enlargement on bail can be on adequate conditions safeguarding the interests of the prosecution as well. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the J.F.C.M. Muvattupuzha and subject to the following conditions:- i) The petitioner shall report before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Muvattupuzha between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays. ii) Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence for the prosecution. iii) The petitioner shall not associate himself with the P.F.I., S.D.P.I. or the N.D.F. until further orders since the role of those organizations in the terrorist activity which was staged in this case is yet to be fully investigated . iv) The petitioner shall not leave the territorial limits of B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:12:- Ernakulam District except with the prior written permission of J.F.C.M. Muvattupuzha. v) The petitioner shall surrender his passport , if any, before the J.F.C.M. Muvattupuzha at the time of executing the bail bond. In case he is not the holder of a passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect before the Magistrate while executing the bail bond. vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence nor shall he involve himself in any prejudicial activity while on bail . In case the petitioner commits breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled. This bail application is accordingly allowed as above. Dated this the 17th day of September, 2010. Sd/-V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. ani/ /true copy/ P.S. to Judge B.A. No. 5360 of 2010 -:13:-