Bijoy Kalita vs State

N.A. Britto, J.—Heard.

Sudan Savlo Dhabale(since deceased) was a driver of Maruti Omni Van bearing No. GA-01-R-7954 operating from Mapusa Taxi Stand.

We could proceed on the assumption that on 17-7-2009, Bijoy Kalita (the applicant herein) along with Mohammad Ali Lindar engaged him (Savlo Dhabale) at about 7.30 p.m. to go to Birla, Cansaulim, on hire. According to the plan, as per the prosecution, the applicant along with Shrinivas and Mohammad Ali were to first do away with Vijay Azaria Rajan as he was suspected by Srinivas as having an affair with his girlfriend by name Ms. Sharon Abranches. The applicant got down at Birla and the Investigating Officer believes that he got down there, and possibly with a view to get the said Vijay Azaria Rajan. As the said Sudan Dhabale did not return home, at the instance of his wife, Crime No. 185/2009 u/s 365 r/w 34 I.P.C. came to be registered. Meanwhile, the said Sudan Dhabale was done away with on the same day i.e. on 17-7-2009 by the said Shrinivas and Mohammad Ali.

The said Maruti van was found in possession of the said Mohammad Ali and Srinivas by Vasco Police Station on 26-7-2009, and they were arrested, and Crime No. 99/2009 under Sections 364-A, 506(ii) r/w 34 I.P.C. was registered. On the same day, the dead body of the deceased Sudan Dhabale was recovered at the instance of the said Srinivas, in a highly decomposed condition at Cuelim, Cansaulim. Once, these facts came to the knowledge of the I.O. of Mapusa Police Station, investigating Crime No. 185/2009, then Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C. came to be added.

The applicant herein was arrested on 1-8-2009 and according to the Investigating Officer he along with the said Srinivas, Mohammad Ali and Ravindra had conspired to kidnap the said driver, then to kill him, and then to use the said van after changing its number, to kidnap the said Vijay Azaria Rajan who was alleged to be friendly with the said Sharon Abranches, the girlfriend of the said Srinivas.

Learned Counsel Shri Poulekar on behalf of the applicant is quick in pointing out that the applicant (Bijoy Kalita) is not an accused in Vasco Police Station Crime No. 99/2009, and, therefore it cannot be said that the applicant herein is in any way concerned with the death of the said Sudan Dhabale. Moreover, learned Counsel submits that it is undisputed that the applicant herein had got down at Birla, and thereafter was not connected with the murder of the said Sudan Dhabale.

From the facts stated herein above, it appears that initial conspiracy was to do away with the driver of the vehicle so that they could have a vehicle and then to kidnap and do away with Vijay Azaria Rajan and this conspiracy is being investigated by two Police Stations, and to some extent in different directions. This position was brought to the notice of the Inspector General of Police through the learned Public Prosecutor, and the learned Public Prosecutor has assured that the matter is being looked into. Though not many details are stated in the reply filed, Crime No. 99/2009 at Vasco Police Station has been registered in connection with kidnapping of another person from Vasco da Gama. It is not known as to when that plan came to be hatched and between which of the accused.

The learned trial Court declined bail to the present applicant, by her Order dated 2-9-2009 observing that sufficient time should be given to the investigating agency to unearth the matter, and the release of the applicant at this stage would definitely hamper the course of the investigation. In my view, the charge against the applicant is very serious. The investigations are still in progress. The driver of the Maruti van was done away with but the conspiracy to do away with the said Vijay Azaria Rajan did not materialize. The reply filed shows that reports of investigations were submitted to the superiors but till date no effort has been made to bring the investigations under one Investigating Officer or a team of Investigating Officers since the facts are common and two Investigating Officers appear to investigate in two different directions. Will the applicant, alongwith others be prosecuted for the first conspiracy at both the places i.e. Mapusa and Vasco? In the past, all serious crimes were discussed at the monthly conference of Police Officers in charge of Police Stations. Doesn''t that happen now?

Be that as it may, considering the seriousness of the charge, I am also of the opinion that sufficient time need be given to the Investigating Officer/s so that all the aspects of the conspiracy are investigated and persons involved are brought to book.

With the above observations, I proceed to reject the application for bail at this stage.