The court denied bail due to the accused's extensive criminal history and ongoing investigation, emphasizing the risk of witness intimidation.

ORDER

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2025 This is the third application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023, by the 1^st accused in Crime No.1466/2023 of the Chalakudy Police Station, Thrissur, which is registered against the accused persons for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 34 1 , 323 , 324 , 308 , 394 , 201 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ,1860. The petitioner was arrested on 25.01.2024.

2. The gist of the prosecution case is that: on 20.11.2023, at around 20.30 hours, the accused, in furtherance of their common intention, trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and they tied the hands of the defacto complainant and committed robbery of Rs.20,000/- from the house of the defacto complainant. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

3. Heard; Sri. Babu S. Nair, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. B.S. Syamanthak, the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. There is no material to substantiate that the petitioner’s culpability in the crime. The petitioner has been in the judicial custody for last one year. The investigation in the case is complete, the charge sheet has been filed and there is no likelihood of the trial commencing in the near future. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Moreover, the petitioner’s mother is on her death bed. The petitioner may be permitted to see his mother before her death. Hence, the application may be allowed.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the application. He submitted that the petitioner is a history sheeter. Petitioner is an accused in 24 crimes, which have been recorded by this Court in Annexure B order. The petitioner has committed serious offences including the offences under Sections 302, 307, 308, 326 and the offences under the NDPS Act and the KAAPA Act. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of him intimidating the witnesses and tampering with the evidence. Moreover, the enlargement of the petitioner on bail would send a wrong message to the society. Hence, the application may be dismissed.

6. When the application came up for consideration on 08.01.2025, this Court had called for a report from the jurisdictional Magistrate, to ascertain the status and the reasonable time required to complete the committal proceedings.

7. Pursuant to the said order, the learned Magistrate, by communication dated 13.01.2025, has informed this Court that although the charge sheet was filed, the defacto complainant had filed an application for further investigation and the same has been allowed on 28.05.2024. Therefore, the further investigation is in progress. Hence, the case has not been committed to the Court of Session.

8. The prosecution allegation against the petitioner is that, he and the other accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, had trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant tied his hands and committed robbery.

9. It may be true that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 25.01.2024 but, the materials on record reveal that the petitioner is an accused in the following crime scenes:

1. Chalakudy PS Cr. 310/2002 u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 452, 506(i) IPC & 27 of NDPS Act

2. Chalakudy PS Cr.478/2003 u/s 385/ IPC

3. Chalakudy PS Cr. 477/2003 u/s 143, 147, 148, 447, 307 r/w 149 IPC & Sec.27 of Arms Act

4. Chalakudy PS Cr. 831/2007 u/s 143, 147, 148, 302 r/w 149 IPC

5. Chalakudy PS Cr. 64/2007 is 323, 324 IPS

6. Chalakudy PS Cr. 323/2012 392 IPC

7. Chalakudy PS Cr. 1687/2012 u/s 392 IPC

8.