BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

1. This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. Petitioners are accused Nos.13, 14 and 15 in Crime No.897/2021 of Alappuzha South Police Station, alleging offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 326, 341, 354, 506, 427, 118, 120(B), 201, 212, 302 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case is that in furtherance of the common object of the accused to murder the son of the defacto complainant, they formed themselves into an unlawful assembly on 19.12.2021, at 6.30 a.m., and committed rioting, armed with deadly weapons and trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and attacked the deceased with a hammer and sword in front of his mother and wife and thereby committed the offences alleged against them. Petitioners are stated to be the conspirators of the crime and they were arrested on 24.01.2022, 07.01.2022 and 17.01.2022 respectively.

4. Sri.John S. Ralph, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that though the final report has been filed in the case arraying the petitioners as accused Nos. 13, 14, and 15, there is no evidence against the petitioners even in the final report filed and hence the petitioners ought to be released on bail. It was also contended that the only overt act as alleged against the 3rd petitioner (15th accused) is about downloading certain photos from the internet relating to few leaders. As regards A13, and A14, the learned counsel contended that they have been arrayed as accused merely because of their position as office bearers of a political organisation. The learned counsel also contended that the only evidence adduced by the investigation while filing the final report are the statements of CW30, CW31 and CW32 and that a perusal of their statements will reveal that, petitioners have not been involved in any conspiracy. The learned counsel also argued that even if all the allegations are assumed to be accepted for argument’s sake, still, it would only reveal that petitioners had intimated the death of one of their party workers to others and such conduct cannot lead to any inference of conspiracy. It was further contended that since the final report has already been filed, and petitioners having been in custody for the last almost six months, they ought to be enlarged on bail.

5. Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand contended that the petitioners are the conspirators of a very heinous crime that shook the State in the recent past and that call data records collected by the investigation clearly point to the petitioners as the main conspirators of the crime. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the brutality of the murder and the manner in which it was executed must compel this Court not to enlarge the petitioners on bail and also that the investigation had collected sufficient materials to prove the complicity of petitioners in the crime. It was also pointed out that the weapon of offence used by the 9th accused was recovered from the house of A15 and he had supplied the routine of the deceased, while the conspiracy to commit the crime was planned in the house of A14, who is regarded as the mastermind of the crime and an active worker of the organisation called SDPL.

6. Sri. V.B.Sujesh Menon, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant (mother) submitted that her son's life was snuffed out in front of her eyes despite her pleadings, by 12 persons, who stormed into her house on the early hours on 19.12.2021. The learned counsel also submitted that the plight of the mother, who had to witness her son's skull being smashed to smithereens in front of her eyes ought not be ignored by the Court and that petitioners being the kingpin of the conspiracy should not be enlarged on bail at this stage, especially since they may flee from justice and even be a further threat to the society, apart from intimidating the witnesses.

7. After appreciating the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the defacto complainant, it is noticed that the call data record of the petitioners would prima facie show the repeated calls from the petitioners to the accused who committed the overt acts. The gravity of the offence and the position of influence that the petitioners can have over the witnesses compel this Court to come to a conclusion that petitioners cannot be enlarged on bail at this stage of the proceedings. The contention of the prosecution that four conspiracies took place resulting in the death of the deceased and each of the petitioners had significant role to play in the conspiracy, though they were not present at the scene of crime, is a matter which cannot be brushed aside at this stage of the proceedings.

8. The ghastly murder and manner in which it was committed, depict a planned and calculated murder. The petitioners being allegedly members of the said conspiracy are pointed out as the brains behind the operation, with each of them playing their role, as hatched in the conspiracy that took place in the house of the 3rd petitioner. The witnesses have also spoken about the involvement of the petitioners. In view of the above, I am not inclined to allow this application.

9. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed.