Kerala High Court
Vijayamohanan vs State Of Kerala on 9 February, 2017
Author: K.Abraham Mathew
Bench: K.Abraham Mathew
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/20TH MAGHA 1938
Bail Appl..No. 741 of 2017
----------------------------------------
CRIME NO. 526/2016 OF MEENAKSHIPURAM POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT
-----------------
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO. 7 :
--------------------------------------------------
VIJAYAMOHANAN,
AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. KRISHNAN, SAIKRISHNA NIVAS,
VILAKANAMKODE, PATTANCHERY.
BY ADVS. SRI.S.RAJEEV
SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
SRI.V.VINAY
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COMPLAINANT :
--------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031,
(CRIME NO. 526/2016 OF MEENAKSHIPURAM
POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT).
2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
MEENAKSHIPURAM POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT- 678 533,
(CRIME NO. 526/2016 OF MEENAKSHIPURAM
POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT).
BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.K.SURESH FOR ADGP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 09-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Msd.
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.
-------------------------------------------
B.A.No. 741 of 2017
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of February, 2017
ORDER
Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
2. Petitioner is the 7th accused in Crime No.526 of 2016 of Meenakshipuram Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 143, 144,147,148,341, 324,326 and 307 r/w Section 149 IPC.
3. He is an RSS worker. He is owner of an Innova car. The victim in this case is a Janata Dal activist. It is alleged that on account of political enmity the petitioner and the co-accused entered into a conspiracy to do away with the victim and in the car belonging to the petitioner the other accused armed with weapons like swords supplied by the petitioner went in search of the victim and assaulted him brutally with the weapons at a shop at 11.20 p.m on 9.11.2016. Learned counsel submits that apart from the evidence that the assailants went to the place of occurrence in his car there is nothing to connect him with the incident.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. There is no dispute that the victim was brutally assaulted on account of political enmity. He sustained very serious injuries. The B.A.No. 741 of 2017 2 accused who actually assaulted the first informant are all RSS workers. The petitioner is also an RSS worker. The first and 5th accused who were arrested during the investigation made a confession to the police. It was revealed that the petitioner was a party to the conspiracy for the murder of the first informant and the petitioner undertook to provide his car and supply the weapons necessary to assault the victim. So there are materials with the investigating officer to connect the petitioner with the incident. A detailed investigation is necessary to ascertain the role played by him and to collect the evidence against him. It is not at all proper to grant him anticipatory bail as it would hamper the investigation.
In the result, this Bail Application is dismissed.
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE pm