IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2009 / 1ST SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3799 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.244/2009 OF KANJAR POLICE STATION APPLICANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------- BINEESH.M.T,AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.THANKAPPAN,MANANKAL HOUSE, MOOLAMATTOM.P.O, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.REP;THE S.I.OF POLICE,KANJAR POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ----------------------------- B.A.No.3799 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.244 of 2009 of Kanjar Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 376 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that the first accused committed rape on the victim. There is no allegation of rape against the petitioner/second accused. The FI statement would disclose that the victim was in love with the first accused and he had taken her to a shed near FCI godown where the offence was committed. In the further statement of the victim, she has given another incident as well in which the second accused facilitated the commission of the offence. On that occasion also, there is no case that the second accused had any sexual intercourse with the victim. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/second accused submitted that he is a temporary employee in KSRTC, Thodupuzha Depot and if he is arrested, he will lose his job. It is submitted that there is no case that the petitioner did any offending act to attract BA No.3799/2009 2 Section 376 IPC. 5. I have perused the case diary. 6. Taking into account the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to get an order for anticipatory bail. 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 between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) 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