Kerala High Court
Akhilesh @ Akhilu vs State Of Kerala on 1 August, 2018
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 3697 of 2018
----------
CRIME NO.210/2017 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION, KASARGOD
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.3:
AKHILESH @ AKHILU,
AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.SURENDRAN, KESAVA KUDEERAM,
GANGAI, KUDGUPPE, KUDLU VILLAGE.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV
SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
SRI.V.VINAY
SRI.D.FEROZE
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
COURT OF SESSIONS, ERNAKULAM
(CRIME NO.210/2017 OF KASARGOD POLICE STATION,
KASARGOD DISTRICT).
ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO.2 IMPLEADED:
2. SAIDA M.E., AGED 22 YEARS,
W/O. LATE MOHAMMED RIYAS,
MADIKERI, KOORG DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA.
(ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 1.8.2018 IN
CRL.M.A. NO.5981 OF 2018)
ADDL.R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE
SRI.M.A.MOHAMMED SIRAJ
SRI.P.PRIJITH
SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR SAJJU S.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-08-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
KRJ
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J
-----------------------------------
B.A. No. 3697 of 2018
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of August, 2018
ORDER
~~~~~~
1. This application is filed under B'439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The applicant herein is the 3rd accused in Crime No. 210 of 2017 registered at the Kasargod Police Station, under B'B'153A, 295, 201, 449, 302 read with B'34 of the IPC.
3. Deceased Mohammed Riyas @ Riyas Maulavi, was the Ustad of the Old Churi Juma Masjid at RD Nagar, Kasaragod. The accused are RSS activists. The case of the prosecution is that the accused Nos. 1 and 2, who are involved in numerous crimes, nursed hatred towards members of the Muslim community. Though the accused had no acquaintance or enmity towards the deceased, they hatched a plan to murder him. The applicant was possessing a bike which was owned by his brother Amaresh. At midnight on 20.3.2017, the accused proceeded to the Juma Masjid, where the deceased was residing, on a bike ridden by B.A.No.3697/18 2 the applicant. The bike was stopped outside the Mosque and accused Nos. 1 and 2 entered the Masjid while the applicant waited outside. It is alleged that the accused Nos. 1 and 2 trespassed into the room where Mohammed Riyas was sleeping and the 1st accused is alleged to have inflicted repeated stab injuries which proved fatal. Hearing the cries of the deceased, CW2 attempted to intervene. He was allegedly threatened by accused Nos. 1 and 2 and was made to flee from the place. After causing fatal injuries to the deceased, the accused Nos. 1 and 2 are alleged to have fled from the scene with the assistance of the applicant. They were then taken by the applicant to the house of his mother to provide them a safe harbour. According to the prosecution, the offence was committed by the accused to strike terror in the minds of Muslims in the area and their intention was to promote disharmony and feelings of enmity between Hindus and Muslims.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been undergoing detention from 22.3.2017. B.A.No.3697/18 3 The prosecution has no case that the applicant is a person with criminal antecedents or that he had inflicted any injuries on the deceased. The only allegation is that the accused had managed to escape from the scene of crime on the bike of the applicant. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the applicant had approached this Court earlier and his application was dismissed with a direction to the learned Sessions Judge to expedite the proceedings. Immediately thereafter, the mother of the deceased approached this Court and has preferred a petition with a prayer to invoke the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The proceedings have been stayed as a result. There is no likelihood of the case being tried in the near future. According to the learned counsel, the applicant would be prejudiced in his defence, if bail is denied to him.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor has fervently opposed the prayer. It is submitted that the allegations are extremely grave and the applicant herein was also intimately involved in the commission of the offence. It is submitted that the area within the limits of B.A.No.3697/18 4 Kasaragod Police Station is communally very sensitive and there have been constant attacks and counter attacks between members of the Hindu and Muslim communities. A detailed list of cases registered after the murder of Riya Maulavi within a radius of 3 kms, which involve B'153A of the IPC is also produced before this Court. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, the accused had no enmity towards Riyas Maulavi and they had murdered him by entering a place regarded as sacred by Muslims to create terror in the minds of the Muslims in the area. It is submitted that the integrity of process cannot be maintained if the applicant is released on bail. Cws. 2 and 3 are eye witnesses and if the applicant is released, there is every likelihood that he would manage to terrorize them and tamper with the evidence. It is submitted that the situation is still tense in the area and the release of the applicant on bail would unsettle the uneasy calm prevailing in the area. It is also pointed out that the case has been scheduled for trial and the proceeding initiated by the mother of the deceased before this Court has been taken up for orders. The learned Sessions Judge has B.A.No.3697/18 5 tentatively posted the case for trial in the 2 nd week of August, 2018 and it is submitted that the release on bail of the applicant at this stage is unwarranted. It is submitted that the application filed earlier was considered and dismissed by this Court by Annexure-A1 order and there are no change in circumstances.
6. The wife of the deceased has filed an application seeking intervention and to oppose the prayer. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the additional 2nd respondent submitted that within the limits of Kasaragod Police Station, during the period from 1.1.2006 to 28.3.2017, as many as 23 cases have been registered under B'153A of the IPC and other offences. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the deceased was murdered while he was inside the Old Churi Juma Masjid. The murder was committed in a daring manner and this has caused revolt and grave apprehension in the minds of persons belonging to the Muslim community in the area. It is further urged that the accused Nos. 1 and 2 are hardened criminals and the applicant herein is their close associate. It is pointed out that in the year B.A.No.3697/18 6 2008, one Mohammed was murdered by RSS workers due to communal rivalry and Crime No.307 of 2018 was registered inter alia under B'B'302 and 153A r/w B'34 of the IPC. In the year 2011, one Rishad, a person belonging to the Muslim community was murdered by RSS workers and Crime No.25 of 2011 was registered inter alia under B'B'302 and 153A r/w B'149 of the IPC. In the year 2013, one Sabith, who was just aged 19 years was murdered and Crime No.566 of 2013 of Kasaragod Police Station was registered inter alia under B'302 and 153A r/w B'149 of the IPC. All these murders were committed within the limits of Kasaragod Police Station as in the instant case. According to the learned Senior counsel, this is one in a series of murders and the release of the accused would lead to serious repercussions.
7. I have considered the submissions and have gone through the case diary. After having gone through the materials, I find considerable merit in the submissions advanced by the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Senior counsel appearing for the additional 2nd respondent. The situation in the area where B.A.No.3697/18 7 the murder had taken place is very volatile. The records reveal that as many as 23 cases have been registered during the past decade. Several persons have been murdered by both sides. After the incident in this case, not less than 13 Crimes have been registered at the Kasaragod Police Station and all those crimes involved B'153A of the IPC.
8. I am unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel that the long period of incarceration undergone by the applicant would entitle him for bail. The deprivation of freedom of the applicant is not for any punitive purpose, but is for the bifocal interest of justice, - to the individual involved and the society affected. As held by the Apex Court in Rajesh Ranjan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav v. CBI through its Director [(2007) 1 SCC 70], the mere fact that the accused had undergone long period of incarceration by itself would not entitle him to be enlarged on bail.
9. I see no reason to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. I direct the learned Sessions Judge before whom the matter is B.A.No.3697/18 8 pending to take expeditious steps to proceed with the trial and take the matter to its logical conclusion.
This application will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN. V., JUDGE ps/1/8/18 //true copy// P To Judge .S.