C.S.Dias, J
1. The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused No.13 in crime No.1275/2023 of the Meenangadi Police Station, Wayanad, registered against the accused (13 in number), for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Secs.365 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was arrested on 28.12.2023.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that: around 8.30 p.m on 07.12.2023, the accused went in three cars and intercepted a car in which the defacto-complainant and his friend were travelling and committed robbery of Rs.20 lakh from the car. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.
3. Heard; Sri. B.Muhammed Shaheel, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha.S, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusation levelled against them. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the crime. Even as per Annexure AI FIR the petitioner has not been named as an accused. Similarly, in the remand application, the petitioner’s name is not mentioned. Subsequently, the police after investigation have filed an additional report stating that the petitioner was driving a vehicle in which the other accused were travelling. The above allegation is only a figment of the prosecution allegation and to implicate the petitioner in the crime. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 44 days. The investigation in the case, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, is practically complete. Recovery has been effected. The petitioner’s continued detention is unnecessary. The petitioner has also no criminal antecedents. The accused 5 and 8 have been granted bail by this Court in BA No.489/2024. Hence, the application may be allowed.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She contended that the petitioner had driven the vehicle in which the other accused were travelling. The investigation is in progress. The accused have committed a heinous crime. If the petitioner is let off on bail, there is every likelihood of him tampering with the evidence, interfering with the investigation and intimidating the witnesses. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and the accused 5 and 8 have been enlarged on bail.
6. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, particularly after going through Annexure A1 FIR and the remand report and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 28.12.2023, which is more than 44 days as on today, the investigation in the case is practically complete, the recovery has been effected and the accused 5 and 8 have been enlarged on bail, I am of the definite view that the petitioner’s continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, he is entitled to be released on bail, but subject to stringent conditions.
7. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is laid, whichever
is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;
(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure 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 in any manner, whatsoever;
(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail;
(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond;
(v) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law;
(vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below.
(vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].
