IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2008 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3558 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.11/2007 OF ALAKODE POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- DEVASSIA @ APPACHI, S/O.ULAHANNAN, AGED 66 YEARS, NADUTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, THENMALA, VELLAD AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI SRI.V.A.SATHEESH RESPONDENT: ------------- THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ALAKODE POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT, (CRIME NO.11/07 OF ALAKODE POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT), REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 3558 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2008 O R D E R This application is for anticipatory bail. 2. A crime was registered against the petitioner for the offence alleged under section 376 IPC. According to the prosecution the defacto complaint was working in the nursery conducted by the petitioner and he committed rape on her and a child was born to her. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant were in love with each other and in the relationship a child is also born to her. The complaint filed by the defacto complainant was originally referred by the police as “mistake of fact”, but later on an application filed by somebody, further investigation was ordered by the court B.A.3558/2008 2 and it is going on. In such circumstances, the petitioner apprehends arrest and hence this application. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that a statement of the defacto complainant was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. and the copy is marked as Annexure-A4. As per the said statement, she was working in the nursery of the petitioner and they were in love with each other and they had physical relationship also and a child was born. But petitioner being a married person and the defacto complainant being unmarried, she has filed the complaint, since, according to her, it was difficult for her to state the name of the father of the child. In short, it appears that it was only to get the paternity of the child recognized through some legal proceedings that the complaint was lodged and she has made it clear that she has made it clear that she has no complaint against the petitioner for the alleged act of sexual intercourse. B.A.3558/2008 3 5. Taking into consideration of the nature of the offence, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that he is opposing the bail application. But, on considering the facts submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the statement given by none other than the defacto complainant herself under section 164 Cr.P.C. disclosing the reason for lodging the complaint, etc., I find that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. 6. Hence the respondent is directed to release the petitioner, in the event of his arrest, on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation as and when directed. The application is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac