[ISRO Espionage] Former DGP Siby Mathews Moves Kerala High Court Challenging Time Limit Imposed On His Pre-Arrest Bail

Former DGP Dr Siby Mathews has approached the Kerala High Court against the order of the Sessions Court dated 24th August aggrieved by the time limit imposed on the pre-arrest bail granted to him in the ISRO espionage case. 

The matter will be considered by Justice K Haripal today.

The criminal case pending before the applicant was registered on the basis of the recommendations put forth by the D.K Jain Committee to conduct an impartial and in-depth investigation by the Central Investigating Agency to unearth the conspiracy behind the allegedly false implication of former ISRO scientist Nambi Narayan and other scientists in the 1994 espionage case. 

The applicant was arrayed as the fourth accused in the case. The allegations raised against the applicant, in particular, relate to the discharge of official duties as the DIG of Crimes in the Kerala Police in 1994. 

The primary contention is that the accused conspired to falsely implicate and prosecute eminent scientists on charges of espionage in pursuance of which the accused arrested the scientists, tortured them, suppressed material facts and tampered with the records of the investigation. 

They were further accused of permitting unauthorised interrogation of a foreign national and the scientists by the Intelligence Bureau in utter disregard of the procedural stipulations.

The accused were accordingly booked under several provisions of the IPC. They approached different courts seeking pre-arrest bail in the matter. 

Although the applicant was granted bail in the matter, the Sessions Court curtailed the relief granted to him for a period of 60 days as the 6th condition in its order. 

The applicant in his application filed through Advocate P.M Rafiq urged that the time limit imposed on the pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant be set aside as it is in stark violation of the law settled by the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v State of NCT of Delhi [2020(5) SCC 1].

In the said judgment, it was laid down that an order under Section 438 Cr.PC should not be limited to a fixed period and that the life of an anticipatory bail may continue till the end of the trial.  

However, in the same decision, a rider has been included whereby if there are specific facts or features in regard to any offence, it is open for the court to impose any appropriate conditions. 

The applicant justified his stand in this regard by submitting that the other accused in the matter had been granted bail by the High court through a common order and that such order did not contain any fixed time limit for the same. 

The application also reads that the petitioner is a senior citizen, a retired IPS officer who has been duly cooperating with the investigation agency so far. 

It was also pointed out that the allegations relate to incidents that date back to 1994, which suggests that custodial interrogation of the petitioner can be dispensed with for the probe. 

The applicant also argued that the Sessions Judge had erred in restricting the validity of the anticipatory bail.

On these grounds, the applicant submitted that the time limit may be vacated and accordingly set aside from the anticipatory bail granted to him to secure the ends of justice.  

Case Title: Siby Mathews v. Central Bureau of Investigation