IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 24TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 685 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME 393/07 OF VENGARA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED (UNDER JUDICIAL CUSTODY) ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SREEJESH, AGED 28, S/O.RAVINDRAN, KIZHAKKEKARA VANNADI HOUSE, ANNUR P.O. PAYYANNUR. 2. K.M.BABURAJ, S/O.BALAN, ANNUR P.O., PAYYANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & FORMAL PARTY --------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA TO BE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. S.H.O., VENGARA POLICE STATION, VENGARA, MALAPPURAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/02/2008, ALONG WITH BA.845/08 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. Nos. 685 and 845 OF 2008 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 13th day of February, 2008 O R D E R These petitions are for regular bail by different accused in the same crime. The petitioners are accused Nos.1, 3, 4, 7 and 8. Accused Nos.1 and 3 are in custody from 6.12.07. Accused No.4 is in custody from 18.12.07 and accused Nos.7 and 8 are in custody from 15.1.08. 2. I have adverted to the facts in detail in the order dated 14.1.08 in BA.No.135/08 and later in the order dated 4.2.08 in BA.604/08. This order must be read in continuation of the said orders and I am not, hence, adverting to the facts in any greater detail in this order. 3. A person was found missing from 5.11.07. FIR was registered under the caption 'man missing' on 8.11.07. Partners, relatives, etc. of the said person started getting anonymous telephone calls demanding huge sum as ransom. The police made attempt to trace the calls. They were traced BA.685 & 845/08 : 2 : to a place in Karnataka. The police party reached there. The detenu, who was kept under detention by accused Nos.1 to 3, was saved from their custody. Investigation was commenced which allegedly revealed that accused Nos.1 to 3 were only persons keeping the detenu under confinement under the instructions of someone else. Accused No.7 had allegedly induced the victim to go over from his native place at Vengara to Mangalore. There, in pursuance of a conspiracy hatched, he was made to believe that he can enter into some property transaction and can consume alcohol in secrecy. Accused No.7 had allegedly performed these acts as part of a ploy for attracting the victim to Mangalore. At Mangalore, the 8th accused along with one Fatha, another suspected accused, had allegedly made arrangements to take the victim there. He was allegedly removed in a car and was kept under confinement till 6.12.07 on which date he was rescued and saved by the police party. 4. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners remain in custody. The application of the 2nd accused has been BA.685 & 845/08 : 3 : dismissed with the observation that he can apply for regular bail again at a later stage not prior to 18.2.08. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are innocent and that they are not in any way responsible for the alleged abduction, confinement or demand for ransom. 6. Accused Nos.1 to 3 are stated to be persons who were keeping the victim in their custody, when he was ultimately rescued on 6.12.07. Accused No.4 had allegedly entered the car in which the victim was and had allegedly performed overt acts to immobilize and to tie a piece of cloth around his eyes. Accused No.7 as stated earlier, had induced the victim to go over to Mangalore as decided by the conspirators. The 8th accused had, allegedly, along with the principal conspirator, the said Fatha, planned and made arrangements to abduct the victim from Mangalore. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is not complete. Investigators require some further time to complete the investigation. The learned Public BA.685 & 845/08 : 4 : Prosecutor opposes the applications for regular bail. 8. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I have already perused the case diary in connection with the earlier bail applications, I am persuaded to agree that the discretion under section 439 Cr.P.C. cannot and need not be invoked in favour of the petitioners now. Investigators in a serious crime like this are certainly entitled to further time to complete the investigation. 9. In the result, these petitions are dismissed. However, I may hasten to observe that the petitioners shall be at liberty to move this court or the Sessions court for bail again at later stages of the investigation not, at any rate, prior to 25/02/2008. The investigators shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks