Kerala High Court
Master Rajesh.P.R vs The State Of Kerala on 19 December, 2018
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
WEDNESDAY,THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 7010 of 2018
CRIME NO.260/CR/OCW-III/PKD OF CBCID, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 2 AND 3:
1 MASTER RAJESH.P.R
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O.P.K. RAVI, PURAKKATT HOUSE, VALAYANCHIRANGARA P.O.,
ARACKAPADY VILLAGE, VENGOLA.
2 RATHEESH KUMAR.A.B.
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.BALAKRSHNAN NAIR, ARACKAL HOUSE, KEEZHILLAM P.O.,
RAYAMANGALAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.PRAMOJ ABRAHAM
SRI.S.NIDHEESH
RESPONDENT/S:
THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM -682 031.
OTHER PRESENT:
ADV.S.SREEKUMAR SR., PP AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.11.2018, THE
COURT ON 19/12/2018 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BA NO.7010/2018 2
O R D E R
Accused Nos. 2 and 3 in Crime No.260/CR/OCW-III/PKD of CBCID,apprehending arrest seek bail.
2. Petitioners herein are the civil police officers in the State of Kerala and now working in two different police stations. The allegation of the prosecution is that, while both of them were working in Perumbavoor police station under the first accused, the SHO, entered into a criminal conspiracy with Accused No. 4, who is a local quarry owner to falsely implicate one Himesh and one Kochu Muhammed who were in inimical terms with the 4 th accused. It was alleged that accordingly two crimes were registered in the above police station as Crime Nos.3337/2015 and 4001/2015 on 22/8/2015 and 9//10/2015 respectively, implicating each of the above persons, in each case. In Crime No.3337/2015, it was alleged that electric detonators and other explosives used for illegal blasting were recovered from the building of Kochu Muhammed on 22/8/2018 during early hours. It was alleged that, he thereby committed offences punishable under the Arms Act. In Crime No.4001/2015, it was alleged that, 1.055 k.gs of ganja were transported by Himesh in an auto rickshaw driven by him. It was seized on 9/10/2015 at 5.30 p.m. According to the prosecution, both the above crimes were falsely registered pursuant to the above conspiracy between accused 1 to 4 and that it was intended as a retaliation against Kochu Muhammed and BA NO.7010/2018 3 Himesh for having initiated legal proceedings challenging the quarrying business conducted by the 4 th accused and for getting the business stayed. It was alleged that he sustained huge loss due to the above litigation.
3. Petitioners have approached this court contending that, they are absolutely innocent and that they are falsely implicated due to personal reasons. It was contended that, though they were working in the above police station during the relevant period, both of them were not in any manner connected with the investigation of the above crime. It was submitted that they have been implicated for the sole reason that they were working in that police station, when both crimes were registered. It was contended that, they have not investigated, nor was in any manner associated with the registration of the crime or filing of the final report. They have only complied with the directions given by the SHO.
4. It was contended by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that, on 22/8/2015, crime No.3337/2015 was registered under section 5(1) of the Explosive Substances Act, against the said Kochu Muhammed. Referring to the FIS, learned senior counsel submitted that, it shows that on 22/8/2015 at about 2.30. a.m., the SHO and his driver had gone for night patrolling. They got secret information regarding the high explosive substances kept under the stair case of building of Kochumuhammed. They conducted search and BA NO.7010/2018 4 recovered 41 electric detonators and 97 gelatine sticks. Grade ASI prepared mahazar. Annexure A2 is the FIR and Annexure A3 is the final report dated 6/11/2017. Case diary indicates that in Crime No.3337/2015, Kochu Muhammed could not be arrested. However, immediately after seizure, his son-in-law was taken into custody and taken to the police station Referring to the above documents, learned senior counsel contended that none of the available records indicates the involvement of the petitioners in the investigation.
5. Learned senior counsel relied on Annexure A4 and contended that the second petitioner was on station guard duty on the relevant day, evidenced by Annexure A4. It was also stated that Annexure A4 further discloses that the first petitioner was on medical leave from 22/8/2015 to 31/8/2015.
6. On 9/10/2015 Crime No. 4001/2015 under section 20 (b)(ii)B of NDPS Act was registered. It was alleged that, secret information was received by the first accused that ganja was kept in a goods auto rickshaw parked at a place near Perumbavoor. The SHO, Grade ASI and two CPOs went to the spot and recovered contraband at 5 p.m. In the presence of seizure witnesses, 1.055 kgs of ganja was recovered. Himish was arrested. It was contended that, the petitioner had no role in the search, seizure, preparation of mahazar or the subsequent investigation.
7. It was stated that the first petitioner completed his duty on BA NO.7010/2018 5 8/10/2015 and left the police station at 9.00 a.m. evidenced by Annexure A6 general diary. It was stated that the second petitioner was on election booth duty on 9/10/2015 and had left the station at 8 a.m. on that morning. Hence, he was not in any manner involved in the search, seizure or the registration of crime.
8. In both the crimes, investigation was taken over by the Crime Branch CID pursuant to the complaint received alleging that the cases were falsely laid and that innocent persons have been implicated and that it was due to personal vendetta. After investigation, both crimes were found to be without any basis. Final report was laid in both cases by the crime branch CBCID alleging that crime was found to be a case of false implication.
9. Case diary reveals that, in the course of investigation by the Crime Branch complicity of 4th accused and three of his accomplices were revealed. They have been arrayed as accused Nos. 5,6 and 7. According to the available materials, investigation in Crime No.260/CR/OCW-III/PKD of CBCID, revealed that the petitioners herein, who are accused Nos. 2 and 3, though did not actively got involved in Crime No. 3337/2015, they had active role in cooking up of Crime No. 4001/2015. It was revealed that it was the petitioners herein who had purchased ganja from a local dealer and aided the 4 th accused in planting it in the vehicle of Himesh. They had allegedly handed ganja to the accomplices of the 4 th accused. Petitioners herein BA NO.7010/2018 6 had detected ganja . Himesh was arrested later on. It was revealed in the course of investigation that the other police personals who were involved in the search and seizure were not aware of the falsity of the case. It s also brought out in investigation that one of the petitioners has been repeatedly contacting one of the accomplie of the 4 th accused, in tracking the movement of Himesh . There are definite materials to suggest that the petitioners have considerable role in the above crime.
10. It appears to be a case of serious allegation where the police officers themselves are involved in charging the innocent persons in false crime. The matter needs to be investigated thoroughly.
In the above circumstances, I feel that granting of pre arrest bail to the petitioners herein may hamper the investigation. Accordingly, Bail application fails and is dismissed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS
dpk JUDGE