Shiril vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 12754 Ker

B.A.No.4395 of 2021                      1



                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                       THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
          MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                            BAIL APPL. NO. 4395 OF 2021
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 999/2021 OF DISTRICT COURT &
                        SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.3 AND 7

      1       SHIRIL
              AGED 30 YEARS
              CHANTHATHOPPIL HOUSE, THANNIPADOM, MANNAM P.O, NORTH
              PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM-683520.
      2       ZAKEER
              AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, MANAPPADATH HOUSE,
              MAVINCHUVADU BHAGAM,
              MANJALIKARA, KARUMALLOOR P.O, ERNAKULAM-683511.
              BY ADVS.
              SAIJO HASSAN
              MANAS P HAMEED


RESPONDENT/STATE

              STATE OF KERALA
0




              REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
              KERALA,
              ERNAKULAM,
              COCHIN-31.

OTHER PRESENT:

              SRI. AJITH MURALI - PP


THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.06.2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 B.A.No.4395 of 2021                  2




                                  ORDER

Application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.3 and 7 in Crime No.248 of

2021 of Nedumbassery Police Station registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 323, 347, 356, 357,365, 395, 212 read with Section 34 of

the Indian Penal Code.

3. The first petitioner has been in custody since 22.4.2021 and the

second petitioner from 21.4.2021.

4. The allegation is that the tenth accused, on getting information

that the defacto complainant who is coming to Nedumbassery International

Airport from abroad is carrying gold and so with the intention to robe the

same, he contacted the 18th accused and all of them waited near the

Airport and when the defacto complainant reached the Airport they

kidnapped him and took him in a taxi hired by them, driven by the first

petitioner and then took him to a lodge at Perumbavoor with the intention

to robe his gold ornaments. There they have robed his money, sunglass,

wrist watch etc. But no gold was found in his possession.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well the learned

Public Prosecutor.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the

petitioners have absolutely no criminal antecedents and in fact the first

petitioner who was residing abroad for a pretty long time is now engaged

with the job of a driver. The car belongs to him was hired by the other

accused. But he was not having any intention to commit the alleged offence

or to indulge in the alleged criminal or illegal activities. But unfortunately

he has been booked by the police. So also, the other petitioners are totally

innocent. But they are undergoing incarceration for the last more than one

month.

7. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners

that some of the accused persons have already been granted bail by this

Court.

8. The learned Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted that the

investigation of the case is well in progress though some of the accused

persons are yet to be apprehended.

8. Having regard to the nature of accusations levelled against these

petitioners, the alleged involvement of these petitioners in the crime, the

other facts and circumstances involved in this case, I think that further

detention may not be required for the Investigating Agency to proceed with

the investigation. Therefore, this petition can be allowed subject to the

following conditions.

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail executing bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him, in writing, till filing of the final report.

(iii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance

with the law.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

smm                                                        JUDGE