The High Court of Kerala dismissed an application seeking pre-arrest bail for the fourth accused charged under IPC Sections 395, 364A, and 323 regarding kidnapping, wrongful confinement, and extortion. The Court held that custodial interrogation was essential to unearth case details.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1941
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1310/2019 OF DISTRICT COURT& SESSIONS COURT,MANJERI
CRIME NO.17/2019 OF Tirur Police Station , Malappuram
PETITIONER/ACCUSED :-
MUHAMMED KOYA K. AGED 43 YEARS S/O. ABOOBACKER.K., KALLAKKANS, NEELANGADITHAZHAM, VALAYANAD P.O, KOMMERI, MANKAVU, KOZHIKODE-673 007
BY ADVS. SRI.M.B.SANDEEP SMT.R.PRIYA
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT :-
1 STATE OF KERALA THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,PIN-683 031
2 INVESTIGATION OFFICER, CRIME BRANCH, TIRUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM, PIN-676 105
HAMSA AGED 56 YEARS, S/O MOIDEENKUTTY, PALLIYALIL HOUSE, THIRUNAVAYA, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
*ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED AS AS PER THE ORDER DATED 13/2/2020 IN CRL.MA NO.1/2020.
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
2
R3 BY ADV. S.RAJEEV R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN R3 BY ADV. SRI.V.VINAY R3 BY ADV. SRI.D.FEROZE RI & R2 BY PP S SAJJU WITH DGP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
3
ORDER
Application for pre-arrest bail.
Crime No.17/CB/MPM/2019 of Tirur Police Station
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 347, 364A and 323 r/w Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
02.10.2018 at about 6.30.p.m Hamsa, the brother of
the defacto complainant was returning from
Coimbatore to Kerala in his fortune car bearing registration No.KL-55-X-9991. When he reached at a place called Ukkadam at about 8.p.m three vehicles surrounded his car and created an accident. When
the driver of the defacto complainant got down from
the car, he was brutally manhandled demanding money. Thereafter, some persons forcefully entered
into the car and taken the defacto complainant to
an isolated place. He was kept in detention and
they demanded an amount of Rs.50 lakhs as ransom
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
4
for his release, from his relatives. His brother
agreed to pay the amount and accordingly, on 03.10.2018 an amount of Rs.10 lakhs was handed over to accused Nos.1 and 3. Hamsa was also manhandled
while he was in wrongful confinement by this accused. Thereafter, they have also demanded further money and documents from him. While he was kept in wrongful confinement by the accused, they have stolen his cash, purse and other valuables with him and also obtained blank cheque leaves,
signed stamp papers in his custody and had
withdrawn money from his account by using his ATM Card, they have taken forcefully from Hamsa and later, he was released on 05.10.2018. Thereby this
petitioner and the other accused have committed the aforesaid offences.
has submitted that in fact he is absolutely
innocent of the allegations levelled against him.
The brother of Hamsa, who is the informant cheated
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
5
so many persons representing that he is one of the Director of George Magnet International U.K, which is a company producing new equipment which saves human beings from electric shock. Accordingly, this petitioner had invested Rs.13,00,000/- on the
bona fide belief that he could secure profit in the business by joining with the brother of the defacto complainant. But he failed to repay the
amount or to start the business with him as agreed, while receiving the amount from this petitioner. Now in order to see whether he could avoid payment some how or other, this case has been falsely foisted against him and the other
accused. He has absolutely no connection with the
alleged incident and he has not committed any
offence as alleged by the prosecution. But he
apprehends arrest and torture by the police and hence this application.
vehemently opposed this application contending that
very serious offences are alleged against this
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
6
petitioner as well the other accused. In fact, 11
accused persons are involved in the crime. On 02.10.2018 at about 8.00.p.m Hamsa the brother of
the informant was intercepted with three other cars and he was kidnapped and demanded Rs.50 lakhs as ransom for his release. Accordingly, on 03.10.2018 Rs.10 lakhs was handed over to accused Nos.1 and 3 as directed by the accused at Kozhikode and even after receipt of the amount of Rs.10 lakhs, he was not released. While Hamsa was in custody, this petitioner and the other accused forcefully taken his cash, purse and other valuables with him including his ATM cards. Thereafter, considerable amount had been withdrawn from the accounts of Hamsa
by the accused and at last, he was released on 05.10.2018, knowing that a complaint had been lodged
by his brother, who is an advocate from Kozhikode.
prosecutor that the investigation of the case is only at preliminary stage and only accused Nos.1 to
3 are arrested and others are yet to be apprehended.
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
7
It is also submitted that only after getting this
petitioner in custody the investigation could be proceeded with.
complainant has submitted that in fact such incidents are quite often happen in our state as well in Tamil Nadu, while passengers are going for various purposes to Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. When Hamsa was abducted, he was taken to an isolated place and there he could see an abducted family, who were also attacked by the accused and detained in
the premises. He had also seen AK 47 gun, weapons, drugs and ladies. It was also shocking to see that the ladies who were brought by these accused persons were sexually assaulted by the assailants in the presence of their husbands and relatives and their intention was to keep them quite and not to lodge any complaint about the harassment. So such illegal activities are going on and some of the victims are ladies and youngsters, traveling out of Kerala for various activities during night along with their
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
8
families. So he is also opposing the bail application filed by this petitioner. It is also submitted by him that his brother, who is a
practicing lawyer, when the defacto complainant was not released by the accused person, even after the
receipt of an amount of Rs.10 lakhs from his
relatives, was compelled to approach this court with a writ petition as 35443 of 2018 and as per an order of this court dated 19.12.2018, investigation was ordered and this court had directed the Police Chief to entrust the investigation of Crime No.620 of 2018
of Tirur Police Station to the Crime Branch within one month and now the investigation has been handed over to CBCID and it is going on.
levelled against this petitioner definitely
Bail Appl..No.262 OF 2020
9
custodial interrogation is required to unearth the
details involved in this matter. Granting of anticipatory bail in such a case does not arise for consideration. Moreover, the investigating agency would require time to collect the details of the accusations levelled against this petitioner as well the other accused involved in the crime. A detailed probe is required. If pre-arrrest bail is granted it will give an opportunity to the petitioner to tamper
with the evidence as well to intimidate the witnesses to the prosecution and thus to cause obstacles to the smooth flow of investigation. Such being the case, I think that this petitioner is not at all entitled for pre-arrest bail as prayed for.
Accordingly, this bail application is
dismissed.
Sd/SHIRCY V. JUDGE
SMA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted to the fourth accused in a kidnapping and extortion case involving mandatory custody for investigation.
Whether granting anticipatory bail would allow tampering with evidence and intimidating witnesses.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Muhammad Koya K.
State of Kerala
Investigation Officer, Crime Branch, Tirur Police Station
Hamsa
Shircy V.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
