IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2010 / 12TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 348 of 2010() -------------------------------- CRIME NO.554/2009 OF VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION. ......... PETITIONER(S): 1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------- ABU, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.KUNJU, BAVUMMEL HOUSE, PUNNAYURKULAM VILLAGE, PAVITTAKULANGARA DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKKEKKAD POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.BHAVADASAN, J. --------------------------- B.A No. 348 OF 2010 -------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of February 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C seeking bail. 2. Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime Mo.554/2009 of the Vadakkekkad Police Station for having committed offences punishable under Sections 376 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66A of the Information Technology Act 2008. The allegations against the accused persons who are two in number are that the 1st accused, on promise to register marriage has taken a lady pretending love and exploited her sexually and thereafter blackmailed her. 3. The petitioner who is the 1st accused is arrested on 01/12/2009. He would say that he is innocent and the case is falsely implicated against him. He points out that the investigation still continue steady unnecessarily. He prays for bail. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the petition. It is pointed out by him that the offences committed are serious in nature and the petitioner deserve no sympathy. It is also pointed out that investigation is not completed but go progress. B.A No. 348 OF 2010 Page numbers 5. The 2nd accused is absconding but the 1st accused is in custody from 01/12/2009 onwards. There is no justification for continue his custody. It is true that the offences are of serious nature but there is nothing to show that petitioner will not be available for trial. Moreover the investigation has progressed to a good extent. In this circumstance, petition is allowed as follows. i) Petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with two solvant sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court. ii) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Friday between 10:00 a.m and 11:30 a.m. iii) Petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv