Mangaluru court rejects bail pleas of four more accused in mob lynching case

The second Additional District and Sessions Court, Mangaluru, has rejected bail applications of four more accused arrested in connection with the mob lynching of 38-year-old rag picker Mohammed Ashraf in Kudupu on the outskirts of the city on April 27.

The Judge, V.N. Jagadeesh, on June 20, rejected the bail applications of Viviyan Alvaris, 41; Shri Dattha, 32; Dhanush, 31; and Kishore Kumar, 37, all from Kudupu.

These four are Accused Nos. 6, 7, 8, and 9 in the case, in which 21 accused persons have been arrested so far. The Judge had earlier granted bail to five accused persons, while rejecting the application of four others.

Photograph evidence

In the order rejecting applications of Alvaris and three others, the Judge referred to the report of the investigation officer (IO) that stated that the accused persons, including the four petitioners, assaulted Ashraf mercilessly. The presence of the accused persons in the assault was captured on the mobile phone of the accused. These pictures on the mobile phone showed petitioners assaulting Ashraf after stripping him naked. The accused disposed of the body of the victim near the railway gate to destroy evidence, the Judge quoted the IO’s report

The Judge also took note of the ‘mahazar’ conducted by the IO on June 14 to seize a pen drive containing 18 photographs of persons found near the place of mob lynching. Mahazar revealed the names of Shri Dattha and three other accused persons, although the presence of the other accused persons is unclear due to the blurred photographs. The IO has collected other evidence indicating the presence of the accused persons, including the four petitioners, at the scene of the incident, the Judge noted.

The subsequent investigation, the Judge said, clearly indicated that the heinous offence of mob lynching was by a gang. The investigation agency strongly apprehends that if petitioners were released on bail, they will tamper with the prosecution witnesses, which could cause a setback to the further investigation. The investigating agency has to collect so much other evidence to come to a logical conclusion in the case. In view of the gravity and seriousness of the offence, the application is rejected, the Judge said.