IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6944 of 2009() ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN BA.6318/2009 DATED 09/11/2009 CRIME NO.562/2009 OF PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- RAMADAS, S/O.MOHANDAS, MUNDASSERY VEEDU, MALA VALIYAPARAMBU DESOM, MURUVILASSERY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6944 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 26th day of November, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.562 of 2009 of Peramangalam Police Station, Thrissur. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 376 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The petitioner had filed B.A.No.6318/2009, which was dismissed by the order dated 9/11/2009. 4. For the sake of convenience, paragraphs 3 and 4 of the order in B.A. No.6318/2009 are extracted below: “3. The prosecution case is that the victim girl aged 12 years was subjected to rape by her step- father on several dates. On 23.09.2009, while the mother of the victim was admitted in the hospital, the petitioner took the girl to the toilet in the hospital and she was subjected to rape. The girl reported to the nurse in the hospital and accordingly the crime was registered. The petitioner was arrested on 28.09.2009 B.A. No. 6944/2009 2 and he was remanded to judicial custody. 4. The offence alleged is a very heinous one. The petitioner is a person who was bound to protect the interests of the victim, she being the step- daughter of the petitioner. Instead of protecting her, the petitioner is alleged to have committed the offence of rape on her. The petitioner does not deserve any discretionary relief. If the petitioner is released on bail, it would affect the well being of the girl. It is also likely that he may tamper with the evidence and intimidate the victim and witnesses.” The present Bail Application was filed on 18/11/2009, just nine days after dismissal of the earlier application. There is no change of circumstances. The investigation is not over. The circumstances under which bail was refused earlier exist even now. Therefore, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm