IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2011 / 26TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8192 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRMP.2921/2011 of J.M.F.C. - I, PARAVUR CRIME NO.549/2011 OF VARAPUZHA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ------------------------ NISSAR, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.MUSTAFA, KATHIYARAKATH HOUSE, MUTHIRAYIL KARA, PUTHIYANGADI VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT CVM HOUSE, MUNDOTH VAYALIL, PUTHIYANGADI. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENT: STATE: --------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE C.I.OF POLICE, N.PARUR THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.K.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/10/2011, ALONG WITH BA.Nos.8384, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383 & 8205/2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 and 8205 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of October, 2011 ORDER These applications for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure arise out of the same crime and therefore, these applications are considered together and disposed of by this common order. The petitioners are the accused persons in Crime No.549 of 2011 of Varapuzha Police Station, Ernakulam District. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 366A, 372, 373, 354, 376 and 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The details regarding the rank of the accused, name of the accused, date of arrest and the Bail Application numbers are shown below:- Rank of the accused Name of the accused Date of arrest Bail Application Nos. A25 Nissar 03/09/2011 8192 of 2011 A15 Muhammed Navas @ Babu 31/08/2011 8380 of 2011 Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 2 : Rank of the accused Name of the accused Date of arrest Bail Application Nos. A16 & A17 Rajesh @ Babu & Issahac 31/08/2011 8227 of 2011 A10 Joshy Joseph 12/08/2011 8385 of 2011 A9 Krishnakulal 12/08/2011 8374 of 2011 A2 Sundari 12/08/2011 8373 of 2011 A5 Binil Kumar 04/08/2011 8497 of 2011 A14 Thahira 24/08/2011 8383 of 2011 A7 & A8 Pushpavathi & Vinod Kumar 12/08/2011 8384 of 2011 A12 Sunny 20/08/2011 8205 of 2011 4. The allegation against the accused persons is that a minor girl below the age of 16 years was procured for the purpose of flesh trade. It is alleged that the girl was sold to accused No.1 (Sobha John) by the parents of the girl on the instigation of the sister of the victim and her husband. 5. On 4.8.2011 at 9.30 P.M., the Circle Inspector of Police, North Parur received information that immoral activities are going on in a house at Olanadukara, within the limits of Varappuzha Police Station. The Circle Inspector and party went to the spot. They found the victim, Binil and Jayarajan Nair engaged in immoral activities in the house. They were arrested. Crime No.549 of 2011 was registered for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Immoral Traffic Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 3 : Prevention Act. At that time, the police was under the impression that the victim in the present case was also an accused involved in the offence under the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act. Investigation revealed that the victim girl was subjected to flesh trade even at the time when she was studying in the 10th standard by none other than her sister and brother-in-law with the connivance of the victim's father and mother. Investigation also revealed that the first accused Sobha John procured the victim girl by purchase from Kasaragod and the girl was taken to several places and she was subjected to sexual intercourse by the various accused persons. Investigation revealed that 36 accused persons and some unidentified persons are involved in the offence. The father, mother, sister and brother-in-law of the victim are also made accused in the case. Among the array of accused, there are assistants, aides and confidants of Sobha John and persons who are involved in the sex racket and also customers. The victim girl is at present in the Child Welfare Home. The investigation is at the initial stage. 6. Now I shall deal with each case. Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 4 : B.A.No.8192 of 2011 The allegation is that accused No.25 (Nissar) is a broker. He along with accused No.19 (Umaiba), accused No.20 (Shafeek) and accused No.21 (Shafana), took the victim girl from Kozhikode to Ernakulam in a Santro car for sex trade. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is only an employee of accused No.19 (Umaiba) and he only hired a Santro Car as directed by her. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that accused No.25 provided two sim cards for the use of accused No.19 (Umaiba). The counsel also submitted that there is no reason why the petitioner should be detained further. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. B.A.No.8380 of 2011 The allegation against the petitioner (accused No.15) is that in December, 2010, the victim girl was taken to Ooty by him and accused Nos.16 and 17. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no case for the prosecution that the petitioner had sexual intercourse with the girl and the allegations would at best disclose an offence Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 5 : under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned State Prosecutor submitted that the offences under Sections 372 and 373 of the Indian Penal Code are also alleged and therefore it is not very relevant whether he had sexual intercourse with the victim. The petitioner was arrested on 31/08/2011. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with effect from 31/10/2011. B.A.No.8227 of 2011 The allegation against the petitioners, who are accused Nos.16 and 17, is that they took the victim girl to Ooty along with Navas (Accused No.15). The petitioners were arrested on 31/08/2011. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case of the “customers” may be differentiated from the case of pimps and procurers. Taking into account the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 31/08/2011, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with effect from 31/10/2011. B.A.No.8385 of 2011 The petitioner herein, accused No.10 (Joshy Joseph) is alleged to be a broker who is involved in the sex racket. Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 6 : Though the petitioner was arrested on 12/08/2011 and he is in judicial custody for more than 60 days, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. B.A.No.8374 of 2011 The petitioner (accused No.9) is the father of the victim. It is alleged that he is a coolie and a drunkard. He is aged 57 years. The allegations would disclose that the victim girl was purchased by Sobha John from the parents of the victim exploiting the impecunious circumstances of the victim and her parents. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that accused No.9 is also a victim of the circumstances. Taking into account the peculiar circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. B.A.No.8373 of 2011 The petitioner, accused No.2, is the mother of the victim girl. It is alleged that she sold the victim girl to Sobha John for a consideration of Rupees One lakh on the instigation of Sobha John, Pushpavathi (Sister of the victim) and Vinod Kumar (husband of Pushpavathi). Accused No.2 is a coolie. Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 7 : Prima facie, there is substance in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that accused No.2 is also a victim at the hands of unscrupulous and greedy persons involved in the sex racket. Accused No.2 is aged 53 years and she is a woman. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. B.A.No.8497 of 2011 The petitioner, accused No.5 (Binil Kumar), is alleged to be a confidant and driver cum body guard of accused No.1, Sobha John. It is alleged that Binil Kumar is involved in the various activities in which the victim girl was made available to various persons involved in the sex racket. Though the petitioner was arrested on 04/08/2011 and he is in judicial custody for more than 60 days, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. B.A.No.8383 of 2011 The petitioner is accused No.14 (Thahira) who is allegedly to be a pimp who operates her business from Calicut and Ernakulam. It is alleged that the petitioner is closely associated with accused No.1 (Sobha John) and she is Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 8 : responsible for presenting the victim girl to various persons for sexual exploitation. Though the petitioner was arrested on 24/08/2011 and she is in judicial custody for 55 days, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. B.A.No.8384 of 2011 The petitioners are accused No.7 (Pushpavathi) and accused No.8 (Vinod Kumar). Accused No.7 is the sister of the victim. It is alleged that she and her husband were mainly responsible for making available the victim for flesh trade by selling her to accused No.1 (Sobha John). Going by the allegations, the petitioners played a prominent part which resulted in the sad plight of the victim girl. Though the petitioners were arrested on 12/08/2011 and they are in judicial custody for more than 60 days, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. B.A.No.8205 of 2011 The petitioner is accused No.12 (Sunny) and the allegation against him is that he committed the offence at the house of Sobha John at Thrikkakara. The petitioner was Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 9 : arrested on 20/08/2011. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with effect from 20/10/2011. In those cases where bail is granted as mentioned above, the petitioner concerned shall be released on bail on execution of a bond for `50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, North Paravur subject to the following conditions:- a) The petitioners shall surrender their Passport before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, North Paravur. If the Passport was seized by the police or if the petitioners do not have a Passport, an affidavit sworn to by them to that effect shall be filed before the learned Magistrate; b) The petitioners shall not either directly or indirectly contact the victim or parents of the victim or sister and brother in law of the victim, in any manner whatsoever, till the trial of the case is over; c) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays and Thursdays for a period of two months and thereafter, on all Mondays till the final report is filed or until further orders; d) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; Bail Appln.Nos.8192, 8380, 8227, 8385, 8374, 8373, 8497, 8383, 8384 & 8205/2011 : 10 : e) The petitioners shall fully co-operate in the matter of Test Identification Parade. f) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; g) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; h) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. B.A.Nos.8380 of 2011, 8227 of 2011, 8374 of 2011, 8373 of 2011 and 8205 of 2011 are allowed as mentioned above and the other Bail Applications are dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj