AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mohammed Nias C.P.J
Apprehending arrest in Crime No. 893/2023 of Mankada police station, the eighth accused in B A No.10363/2023 and accused Nos.2 and 3 in BA No.10386/2023 have filed these applications u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure registered alleging offences punishable under Section 379 and r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case is that on 10.11.2023, while the respondent police were questioning an accused involved in Crime No.857/2023 of that police station, they got information that on 16.9.2023, a lorry bearing registration No.KL 02 R 7131, involved in a sand case, was taken away from the police station premises by him and other 7 persons. Therefore, on the basis of this information, the Sub Inspector of Police registered a case as Crime No.893/2023 against 8 persons alleging commission of the above-said offences and thereby committed the above offence.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that it is only on the basis of the confession of the co-accused that they were roped in; the only allegation is that A1 and A2 had instructed the other accused. The allegation is of theft of a lorry from the police station premises. Learned counsel submits that he was not present at the scene. It is also pointed out that the alleged incident happened on 16.9.2023, and the FIR was registered only on 10.11.2023,
The learned Prosecutor has filed a report in the instant case stating that Saleem Bai, Akbar, Abdul Muneer, Aneesh, Riyas and Basheer Baba were present on the spot when the vehicle was taken, and the investigation revealed that the investigation conducted as far, in this case, it is revealed that on 16.09.2023 at 14.00 hours as per preplan and the instruction of the accused 1 and 2 namely Sadik Basha and Sreenivasan, the accused 3,4,5,6,7 and 8 Saleem Bai, Akbar, Abdul Muneer, Aneesh, Riyas and Basheer Baba respectively stolen away the vehicle bearing registration No. KL 02 R 7131 seized by the police involved in Crime No.254/2014 under section 20, 23 of KPRB & RRS Act and kept in the safe custody of police,650 meters away from the police station at Palakkathadam and to clear check posts forged documents and took away the vehicle tying to the crane of the first accused to the vehicle scrap yard named Keerthana Traders at Pollachi owned by the second accused. From the investigation conducted, it is revealed that the sixth accused of the case cited in the reference, namely Aneesh, who is also the first accused in Mankada police station Crime No.857/2023, 865/2023, 866/2023 under Section 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the IPC forged documents to release vehicles seized by police involved in crimes and the released vehicles bearing registration Nos.KL 58 5833, KL 10 Q 4517, and KL 12 C 2034 were taken to the vehicle scrap yard named Keerthana Traders at Pollachi, owned by the second accused in this case, Sreenivasan.
Having regard to the fact that the petitioners were admittedly not present at the scene of occurrence and that they were impleaded on the basis of the confession of the co-accused, no materials as such implicating the petitioners have been found so far. The delay in registering the F.I.R. also assumes significance as no plausible explanation is given for the same. Given these facts, I do not think the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail applications are allowed subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners are directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today, and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can interrogate the petitioners. In the event of their arrest, the Investigating officer shall produce the petitioners before the jurisdictional court on the date of surrender itself.
(ii) On such production, the jurisdictional court shall release the petitioners on bail, on executing separate bonds for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand only) each by the petitioners and by two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
(iii) . The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.
(iv) The petitioners shall not intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the Investigation in any manner.
(v) The petitioners shall not be involved in any offence while on bail.
It is made clear that it is within the power of police to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners, even when the petitioners are on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State ( NCT of Delhi) and another [2021 (1) KHC 663].