"There Is No Material To Show That There Was Any Conspiracy": Sessions Court While Granting Anticipatory Bail To Siby Mathews In ISRO Espionage Case

Sessions Judge P Krishna Kumar on Tuesday while granting anticipatory bail to 4th accused in the ISRO espionage case, Dr. Siby Mathews, remarked as such:

"When the entire Case Diary and the said report were carefully perused, I find no materials which would prima facie indicate the ingredients of the offence u/s.365 of I.P.C. There is also no materials to show that there was any conspiracy in respect of the said offences."

Accordingly, the Court granted pre-arrest bail to former DGP Siby Mathews in the matter where an ISRO scientist was implicated in a case of espionage in the 1990s. 

The respondents objected to the application claiming that former scientist Nambi Narayanan was taken into custody without any grounds and was wrongfully confined in the Police Station for a while. 

They claimed that this amounted to kidnapping or abduction within the meaning of Section 365 of IPC., even though he was later produced before the Magistrate. 

They further opposed the bail plea arguing that if the relief of pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner, who is said to have played a pivotal role in the above-said crime, for an endless period, it may seriously prejudice the investigation. 

The Court found no merit in the submission since the Case Diary itself revealed sufficient materials which had compelled the Police to arrest the accused, although those reasons were ultimately found to be baseless. 

"...when there are materials on record to show that those Scientists had repeatedly contacted a Maldivian national, it is difficult to say that the arrest of those persons in the said circumstance would prima facie amount to the offence of 365 of I.P.C."

Although the records prima facie show that Nambi Narayanan was subjected to physical and psychological torture while he was in the custody, this allegation does not prima facie reveal a non-bailable offence, the Court noted.

It was also found that the Case Diary produced by the CBI did not compel the court to reject the application for pre-arrest bail on any of the grounds canvassed by the prosecution or the learned counsel for the victims. 

Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail was granted in favour of the petitioner. 

Advocate V. Ajaykumar appeared for the petitioner and Senior Public Prosecutor T.P Manoj Kumar represented the CBI in the matter. 

Case Title: Dr. Siby Mathews v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors. 

Click Here To Download The Order