SUJEESH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are applications for regular bail moved by some of the accused persons in crime 146/2021 of Kodakara police station which was registered alleging offence under Sections 120B, 395, 212 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The genesis of the crime is an incident that happened at 4.40 a.m. on 03.04.2021 near the Kodakara over-bridge on the National Highway, NH-544. It is alleged that while the informant Shamjeer along with accused No.16, was moving in Ertiga car KL-56G 6786 from Kozhikode to Ernakulam, accused Nos.1 to 7 chased them in three cars and at the place of occurrence intercepted the said Ertiga car, pulled out CW1 and the 16th accused, manhandled them, smashed the windowpane of the car and driven away the car. The car was taken to the residence of the 9th accused where, an amount of Rs.3.5 crores concealed in the secret chambers of the car was looted by accused persons and the looted amount was divided among the accused persons. The crime was registered on 07/04/2021 alleging that an amount of Rs.25 lakhs was looted by some of the accused persons. But during the course of investigation it came out that money involved was Rs.3.5 crores and on that basis investigation was entrusted with a special team headed by the respondent the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chalakudy, who, after completing the investigation, laid the charge sheet against 22 accused persons. These bail applications were filed when investigation was at the final stage. After completing the investigation, charge sheet has since been laid and the case is now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Irinjalakuda.

(2.) I heard learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution. The following table will give a brief idea about the number of cases, the rank of the accused persons and the respective dates of their arrest.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners wanted to say that the petitioners are innocent; they have been falsely implicated, that they did not play any role in the alleged commission of the crime. According to the learned counsel for the 2nd accused it is a political gimmick played by two prominent political parties, that both of them have no bonafides in bringing out the actual facts of the case. According to him, the amount allegedly involved is hawala money. It is unaccounted money which was being transported to be used for the election that was scheduled to the legislative assembly immediately after the incident and that was why the defacto complainant was hesitant in alerting the police. The police also plays hide and seek game at the instance of higherups and is not interested in bringing to book actual culprits. The 2nd accused has also raised a contention that 'since it is unaccounted money, the person who is legally entitled to possess the amount is still a mystery; unless there is claim of legal possession of the stolen article by a person who is legally entitled to possess the same, any amount of proof regarding taking away of the booty cannot amount to theft. When there is no theft, further act will not constitute dacoity since without proof of theft the offence under dacoity will not be legally sustainable for want of sufficient ingredients to attract dacoity'.