IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3958 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.301/2009 OF MALA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED -------------------- KUMAR @ SREEKANTH, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. KARTHIKEYAN, MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KONATHAKUNNU, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.3958 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of August, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.301 of 2009 of Mala Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 30.3.2009, the accused committed the offence at the residence of the defacto complainant. The FI statement is dated 18.4.2009. It is seen that the defacto complainant and the accused were neighbours. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on 12.4.2009, the brother of the petitioner filed a petition before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Irinjalakuda, stating that the petitioner was detained by the father of the defacto complainant and the petitioner was rescued by his brother. Thereafter, one Mukesh and his friends, who are friendly with the father of the defacto complainant, threatened the petitioner's BA No.3958/2009 2 brother. In the petition, it is stated that he was called to the police station by the C.I. of Police on 9.4.2009. 5. On a perusal of the case diary file, an unsigned photo copy of a petition dated 8.4.2009 is seen. The petitioner therein is the defacto complainant and the respondent therein is the accused herein (petitioner in the Bail Application). In that petition, the allegation is that on 30.3.2009, the petitioner committed the offence as mentioned in the FI statement in the present case. On a perusal of the case diary, it is also seen that before the Assistant Surgeon, Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Kodungallur, the defacto complainant stated that herself and the petitioner were moving together on the assurance made by the petitioner that he would marry her and that they had sexual relationship. 6. It cannot be said that the apprehension voiced by the petitioner in the Bail Application is out of place. There was dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. The contention put forward by the petitioner is that the case of an offence under Section 376 IPC having been committed is put forward only to pressurise him and only to gain advantage. It is BA No.3958/2009 3 not necessary to decide the disputed question of fact in the Bail Application. It is also not necessary to make any observation touching upon the merits of the case while disposing of the application for bail. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation on any date suggested by the investigating officer. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer for the purpose of undergoing the potency test on the date or dates as fixed by the investigating officer. b) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; BA No.3958/2009 4 c) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; d) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; e) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; f) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl