IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSAYD, THE 6TH JANUARY 2011 / 16TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 8025 of 2010() ------------------------- CP.7/2010 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM In R.C. 34/2010 (S) 2010/CBI/TVPM .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED 5 & 8 TO 10 ----------------------------- 1. ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED, BAIKATTU HOUSE, PAIVALIKE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. 2. RAVI @ RAVI PACHAMBALA, S/O.SUBAIAH MADIVAL, AGED 26 YEARS, PACHAMBALA HOUSE, PAIVALIKE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. 3. RADHAKRISHNA @ KITTU, S/O.GANGADHARAN, AGED 30 YEARS, KUTHIRKODU HOUSE, PAIVALIKE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. 4. ABDUL RASHEED, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, AGED 22 YEARS, PAIVALIKE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. C.B.I., REPRESENTED BY THE STANDING COUNSEL, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADDL. R2: Achu, S/o. Andunhi, Kasekkar House, Perala P.O. Kasaragod - impleaded as per order in Crl.M.A. No. 8763 of 2010 dated 3-11-2011. Standing Counsel Sri.M.V.S. Namboothiri for R1 ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR FOR ADDL.R2 THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/01/2010,ALONG WITH BA NO. 8511 OF 2010 BA NO. 8316 OF 2010 THE COURT ON 06/01/2011 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Bail Application Nos. 8025, 8316 and 8511 of 2010 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 6th January, 2011 ORDER In these applications for regular bail filed by some of the accused persons in Crime No. RC 034 2010 S 0010 CBI TVPM (formerly Crime No. 213/2009 of Badiadukka Police Station in Kasaragod District) now charge-sheeted by the C.B.I. for offences punishable under Sections 120 B, 143, 147, 148, 341, 302, 201 and 212 read with Sec. 149 I.P.C., seek their enlargement on bail. Going by the rank assigned in the final report filed by the C.B.I., the petitioners in B.A. 8025 of 2010 are accused Nos. 5 and 8 to 10 . The petitioner in B.A. 8316 of 2010 is the 6th accused and the petitioner in B.A. 8511 of 2010 is the 4th accused. The occurrence took place on 3-11-2009 at 10.30 p.m. at a place called Ukkinadukka in Kasaragod District . One Abdul Basheer @ Jabbar aged 26 years and Bail Application Nos. 8025, 8316 and 8511 of 2010 -:2:- who was an active worker of the Congress I party and the Secretary of the Youth Congress at Perla in Kasaragod District was brutally murdered by hired assassins allegedly engaged by certain activists belonging to the Marxist Communist Party ("CPI M" for short) . The assailants were armed with deadly weapons like swords, knives, steel rods, axe and chopper etc. The hirelings are allegedly from the neighbouring State of Karnataka. Deceased Jabbar sustained fatal injuries (25 bleeding injuries) on his person . Eventhough he was initially rushed to Sastri Hospital and then to E.K. Nayanar Hospital and finally to Carewell Hospital at Kasaragod, he succumbed to the injuries and was pronounced dead at 12 midnight on 3-11-2009 by the doctor at Carewell Hospital. The first information statement was lodged by one Abdul Harif of Ukkinadukka before the Badiadukka Police at 2.30 a.m. on 4-11-2009. 2. Alleging that the main conspirators who plotted the death of Jabbar were local Marxist Party activists and there was political interference by the ruling party in the smooth investigation of the case Bail Application Nos. 8025, 8316 and 8511 of 2010 -:3:- by the State Police, Assinar @ Achu, the father of the deceased filed a Writ Petition before this Court as W.P.(C) 2797 of 2010 seeking a direction to hand over the investigation of the case to the C.B.I. The said prayer was granted by this Court despite the opposition by the State. The C.B.I. took over the investigation of the case and have now finally laid the charge-sheet before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam on 2-11-2010. 3. The dates of arrest of the respective of the petitioners are as follows:- A4 - 06-09-2010 A5 - 05-08-2010 A6 - 06-09-2010 A8- 31-08-2010 A9- 31-08-2010 A10 - 06-09-2010 4. I heard Sr. Advocate Sri. M.K. Damodaran appearing for accused Nos. 5, 6 and 8 to 10 and Advocate Sri.T.G. Bail Application Nos. 8025, 8316 and 8511 of 2010 -:4:- Rajendran, the learned counsel appearing for A4. I also heard Adv. Sri. M.V. S. Namboothiri, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the C.B.I. and Adv. Sri.S. Sreekumar, the leaned counsel appearing for the father of deceased Jabbar. 5. Eventhough the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners fervently pleaded for the release of the petitioners in the light of the fact that the final report has already been laid before the committal Court, I am not inclined to accede to the said plea. It was after the filing of the final report that this Court on 9-11-2010 dismissed similar applications for bail filed by the petitioners. The common order passed by this Court is reported in Abdulla Kunhi and others v. C.B.I. - 2010 (4) KHC 626. Detailed reasons have been given in the said order as to why the petitioners cannot be released on bail before the conclusion of trial of the case. I do not find any good reason to differ from the reasons stated and conclusions reached while disposing of the Bail Application Nos. 8025, 8316 and 8511 of 2010 -:5:- earlier bail applications. In fact, the learned counsel appearing for the father of deceased Jabbar brought to my notice the complaints filed before the local police by three of the important witnesses by name Radhakrishna Naik, Abdul Harif and Subair Ahmmed alleging that they received threatening calls to the effect that if they gave evidence in support of the prosecution they will also meet with the same fate as Jabbar. In the light of these supervening circumstances and once again taking note of the observations of the Apex Court in Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiaqu Hasan Khan and Another - 1987 SCC (Crl.) 415, Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan - (2004) 7 SCC 528 and Masroor v. State of U.P. - (2009) 14 SCC 286, I am not inclined to order release of the petitioners on bail. If released on bail before the trial of the case the petitioners will definitely influence and intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will also make Bail Application Nos. 8025, 8316 and 8511 of 2010 -:6:- themselves scarce as is apprehended by the prosecution. These applications are accordingly dismissed. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam shall commit the case to the Sessions Court at the earliest (if not already committed). The Sessions Court or Additional Sessions Court to which the case stands made over shall expedite the trial of the case bearing in mind that the petitioners are languishing in jail as under- trial prisoners. Dated this the 6th day of January, 2011. Sd/-V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) ani/ /true copy/ P.S. to Judge Bail Application Nos. 8025, 8316 and 8511 of 2010 -:7:-