IMPORTANT POINTS
The police custody is impermissible after the expiry of the first fifteen days of remand of the accused after his first arrest in the crime. Therefore, the present custody application cannot be legally sustained-There is no bar in granting bail to the accused in this case, ignoring the said custody application.

ORDER :

The petitioners are accused Nos. 2 to 7 in RC 01 (S)/2020/CBI/SCB/TVPM of CBI (Crime No. 390/CB/IDK/R/2019 of CBCID) registered for the offences punishable under Sections 343, 348, 323, 324, 330, 331 and 302 read with Section 34 IPC.

2. The petitioner Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 6 were granted bail by this Court as per Annexure Nos. A2 to A4 orders and petitioner Nos. 1 and 5 were granted bail by the Sessions Court as per Annexure – A1 order. Initially, the bail was granted at the time, when the case was under investigation by the Crime Branch. Thereafter, the case was transferred to CBI for investigation. Annexure – A6 FIR was registered by CBI on 24.01.2020. The petitioners were required to appear before the present Investigating Officer on 18.02.2020. Accordingly, all the petitioners appeared before the Investigating Officer on that date. The Investigating Officer arrested the petitioners and produced them before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam. The learned Magistrate, as per Annexure–A10 order, dismissed the application for bail filed by the petitioners and remanded the petitioners to custody.

3. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners Advocate Sri.K.Gopalakrishna Kurup, the learned Retainer Counsel for CBI, Advocate Sri. Sasthamangalam S. Ajith Kumar and the learned Counsel for the second respondent, Advocate Sri. Yash Thomas Mannully.

4. The first question to be considered is as to whether the arrest of the petitioners by the Investigating Officer on 18.02.2020 was justified or not. It is not disputed that Annexure Nos. A2 to A4 orders passed by this Court and Annexure – A1 order passed by the Sessions Court were not challenged before the Hon'ble Apex Court. The bail granted to the petitioners by this Court and the Sessions Court was not challenged before this Court or before the Hon'ble Apex Court.

As per Annexure – A5, the bail granted by this Court to the first accused was cancelled by the Hon'ble Apex Court. It can be seen from Annexure – A5 that the application for cancellation of bail was filed by the prosecution against the first accused alone. It appears from Annexure – A5 that the question of cancellation of bail granted to the petitioners was not under consideration by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Annexure – A5 order. It is clear from Annexure – A5 order that the Hon'ble Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to the first accused alone as per the above said order. Thus, it can be seen from Annexure – A5 that the bail granted by this Court or the Sessions Court to the petitioners was not cancelled by the Hon'ble Apex Court as per Annexure – A5 order. In the said circumstances, the bail granted by this Court and the Sessions Court to the petitioners was in force at the time when they were arrested by the Investigating Officer on 18.02.2020. Even then, the petitioners were arrested by the present Investigating Officer without any lawful authority. The learned Magistrate in-charge of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate remanded the petitioners.

5. It is settled law that once bail is granted to a person, that bail will be in force until and unless it is cancelled by the Court granting the bail or by the superior court. In this case, it is admitted by the learned Retainer Counsel for the CBI that no application was filed by the Investigating Officer for cancelling the bail, already granted to the petitioners. Thus, it appears that the petitioners were arrested by the Investigating Officer during the period when the bail granted by this Court was in force. The Investigating Officer ought to have approached the Court for cancellation of the bail granted to the accused by this Court in the light of the observations in Annexure-A5 order before arresting the petitioners. However, that can be done even now.

6. The Investigating Officer ought to have obtained permission from the Court, which granted bail to the petitioners before arresting the petitioners. The learned Magistrate, who was in-charge of t