Allowed

C.K.Ramachandran v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Kerala HC27 May 2011Bail Appl./3786/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted bail to the 14th accused in a murder case involving police torture and death in custody, but only effective from a future date due to pending investigation concerns.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail w.e.f. 06-06-2011 via bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to nine specific conditions including reporting every Wednesday.

C.K.Ramachandran Vs Central Bureau of Investigation — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2011 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3786 of 2011() ----------------------------CRIME NO. RC 034/2010 (S) 0008/CBI/TVPM. ....................

¶6

ACCUSED A14

¶7

¶8

C.K.RAMACHANDRAN, (THEN DEPUTY

¶9

SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD, PRESENTLY UNDER SUSPENSION), S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 50 YEARS, LEELA NIVAS, VARAVOOR P.O., THRISSUR.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT

¶12

¶13

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, REPRESENTED BY STANDING COUNSEL, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, SCB, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (CRIME NO. RC 034/2010 (S)0008/CBI (TVPM).

¶14

STANDING COUNSEL FOR CBI SRI. P. CHANDRASEKARA PILLAI

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2011, THE COURT ON 27-05-2011 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶17

........................................................ Bail Application No. 3786 of 2011

¶18

Dated: 27-05-2011

¶19

ORDER

¶20

In this application filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who is the 14^th accused in Crime No. 251 of 2010 of Palakkad Town North Police Station (subsequently reregistered as Crime No. 259/CR/HHW-II/CBCID, Ernakulam and further re-registered as RC No. 034-2010-S 008/CBI/Tvpm) for offences punishable under Sections 120 B, 302, 218, 201, 465, 471 and 348 I.P.C. seeks his enlargement on bail

¶21

Adv. Sri. P. Chandrasekhara Pillai, the learned Standing Counsel for the C.B.I. opposed the application contending inter alia as follows:-

¶22

The release of the petitioner on bail at this stage will be detrimental to the smooth investigation of the case. , The petitioner , if released, will abort the investigation . This is

¶23

Bail Application No. 3786 of 2011 -:2:-

¶24

not an ordinary murder case but the brutal killing of the suspect in another murder case, by resorting to 3^rd degree torture while in police custody . Even assuming that deceased Sampath had a role to play in the murder of Sheela the police have no business to torture him to death under the guise of interrogation with a view to extract a confession. The petitioner is one of the superior officers who had given directions to manipulate records so as to screen the police comrades who had taken the life of Sampath through brutal torture.

¶25

Adv. Sri. S. Rajeev, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made the following submissions before me :-

¶26

It has already been found by the Sessions Judge, Palakkad in the Sheela Murder Case that deceased Sampath was the prime culprit who along with another person had brutally killed Sheela. The police had a duty to apprehend Sampath and interrogate him. Unfortunately, Sampath died

¶27

Bail Application No. 3786 of 2011 -:3:-

¶28

while in police custody. The petitioner who has a blemishless record with great investigation skills had no role in the alleged torture of Sampath. The only apprehension expressed in the last remand report filed by the C.B.I. is that being a high ranking police officer the petitioner will interfere with the investigation. There is no case for the C.B.I. that the continued detention of the petitioner is necessary for the further investigation of the case. The apprehension that the petitioner will interfere with the investigation can be taken care of by this Court imposing appropriate conditions to allay the said apprehension.

¶29

After bestowing my anxious consideration to the rival contentions, I am of the view that having regard to the 61 days of judicial custody undergone by the petitioner after the C.B.I. took over the investigation, the vicarious role played by the petitioner, the present stage of the investigation of the case and the other circumstances of the

¶30

Bail Application No. 3786 of 2011

¶31

-:4:-

¶32

case, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner but only with effect from a future date. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail w.e.f. 06-06-2011 on his executing a bond for ` 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam and subject to the following conditions:

¶33

1. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays till the filing of the final report.

¶34

2. The petitioner shall not enter the territorial limits of Palakkad District until further orders to be passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam .

¶35

3. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who is acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him or her from disclosing any information to the Court or to the police or to any other person in authority .

¶36

4. The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer at any time till the filing of the final report.

¶37

5. The petitioner shall not establish any contact with any of the witnesses or accused in the case.

¶38

Bail Application No. 3786 of 2011

¶39

-:5:-

¶40

6. The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses or the victims nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence for the prosecution.

¶41

7. The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶42

8. The petitioner shall notify to the Court his place of residence before executing the bail bond.

¶43

9. Before executing the bail bond, the petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam . In case the petitioner is not the holder of a passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect before the said Magistrate.

¶44

If the petitioner commits breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶45

This application is allowed as above.

¶46

Dated this the 27^th day of May, 2011.

¶47

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

¶48

ani/

¶49

Bail Application No. 3786 of 2011 -:6:-

¶50

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

¶51

ani/

¶52

Bail Application No. 3786 of 2011 -:7:-

C.K.Ramachandran v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.K.Ramachandran v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mini Jayakumar Vs State of Kerala

Jayakumar Vs State of Kerala

K.S.E.Board Vs Daniel K.M.

K.K.Noushad Vs Mr. Muhammed Haneef

Mohanakurup Vs D.Prasannakumar

Ramakrishnan and Others Vs P.K.Nazeer