Read Time: 08 minutes

The Kerala High Court on Thursday granted bail to a suspected Maoist undertrial, charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and in judicial cutody since 2015.

The division bench of Justice K Vinod Chandran and C Jayachandran while granting bail to Ibrahim alias Babu, who was lodged in judicial custody observed that,

“...though the accused shared the same ideology of another accused, was living with the other accused, was aware of the planning (of attack) — prima facie there is nothing to show his involvement.”

As per the facts of the present case, Ibrahim was arrested in 2015 in connection with an attack on the house of a civil police officer in Wayanad in 2014. When the National Investigation Agency (NIA) took over the probe, it charged him under Section 43D(5) of UAPA.

“Section 43D(5) - no person accused of an offense punishable under Chapters IV and VI of this Act shall, if in custody, be released on bail or on his own bond unless the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity of being heard on the application for such release”.

The charge on the accused according to NIA was that he was a native of Meppadi in Wayanad and had supplied weapons to a group engaged in propounding Maoist ideology.

The group had allegedly threatened to kill a civil police officer involved in anti-Maoist operations and set his two-wheeler ablaze. The NIA had made another accused TV Rajeesh an approver, an auto driver at Payyoli in Kozhikode, in the case

“…the allegation against the accused was that he supplied arms to the group, who are propounding Maoist ideology. The said group had also trespassed into the house of a Police Officer, trained a gun at him and threatened him with death, if he does not resign his job and stop helping the Police in Anti-Maoist operations. The assailant group had also set ablaze the motor cycle of the said Police Officer, hurled pamphlets inside his house and pasted posters on the front wall of the house, calling for an armed revolution against the Government of India."

The evidence against Ibrahim was that of the approver, who in a statement under Section 164 CrPC had said that he had seen the accused living and moving with another accused Anoop Mathew (currently in judicial custody).

When the approver was with the other two accused persons, one of them, Mathew, made some statement about the intended action. Mathew carried four bags, the shape and weight of which indicated that the objects inside the bags were arms.

Lastly, while disposing of the criminal appeal and considering the totality of the circumstances, the bench was of the opinion that the appellant shall be released on bail, on the following conditions:

1. The petitioner shall be released on bail on execution of a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only), with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court;
2. (From the date of his release, he shall report before the S.H.O, Ernakulam Town Police Station between 10.00 A.M. and 11.00 A.M. on every Friday starting from 24.12.2021.  
3. He shall not involve in any offence while on bail;
4. The appellant shall also file an affidavit before the lower court, undertaking not to object to the day to day proceedings of trial, which shall be carried out either in the presence of himself or his Advocate.  
5. The appellant/accused shall appear before the Trial Court when any witness is examined, who has to identify the appellant/accused and if not present, he shall waive his right to raise the question of identification.
6. The accused shall also not leave the jurisdictional limits of the Ernakulam District, without prior permission obtained from the Trial Court.

Cause Title: Ibrahim @ Babu vs Union of India