IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH APRIL 2009 / 8TH VAISAKHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1393 of 2009() ------------------------- CRIME NO.35/2009 OF DHARMADAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------- SATHEESHAN.N.V. AGED 53 YEARS, LAKSHMI VAS, DHARMADAM, THALASSERY TALUK BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SOHAN SMT.SREEJA SOHAN.K. RESPONDENTS/STATE: -------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA (SHO DHARMADAM POLICE STATION),(CRIME NO.35 OF 2009) REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THALASSERY. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.1393 OF 2009 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of April, 2009 O R D E R Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.35/2009 of Dharmadam Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 506(i) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Petitioner, not a member of the SC or ST community, is alleged to have committed rape of the defacto complainant, a member of the ST community, who was employed as a maid servant in his house, on several occasions. She got impregnated through petitioner and delivered a child, is the further allegation. The investigation of the crime for the offences registered on a complaint given by the victim, is now pending, and at this stage, the petitioner, who had unsuccessfully moved an anticipatory bail before the Sessions CRL.M.C.1393/09 2 Judge, after the dismissal of that petition has come before this Court praying for quashing the FIR registered over the crime or in the alternative to issue appropriate direction to the Investigating Officer for releasing him on bail subject to conditions, as may deem fit and proper to this Court. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Public Prosecutor. Petitioner is absolutely innocent of the imputations and allegations raised against him and he is prepared even to undergo DNA test, with that of the child, to substantiate his denial of the paternity of the child and a direction be issued to the Investigating officer to have such DNA test after releasing him on bail, subject to the conditions as found fit and proper, is the submission of his counsel. The allegation presented in the case do not make out any offence under the SC & ST (PA) Act, is the further submission of the counsel for a further direction to the Investigating Officer to proceed with an investigation, if found necessary, only for the offence under Section 376 of the IPC. Opposing the reliefs claimed on the petition, the learned CRL.M.C.1393/09 3 Public Prosecutor submitted that the materials so far collected by the Investigating agency prima facie indicate the culpability of the petitioner for the grave offences imputed and he cannot seek direction from this court, the manner in which the investigation is to be proceeded with. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved and the submissions made by the counsel, I find that at this stage, the investigation over the crime registered for grave offences is pending, that too, on the basis of the complaint given by the victim, a member of the ST community, and also taking note of the submission of the Public Prosecutor that the materials so far collected indicate the culpability of the petitioner in the offences imputed, I find none of the reliefs claimed in the petition can be entertained. The victim was a house maid in the house of the petitioner. The allegation that she was ravished on several times by him and consequent to which, she delivered a child necessarily require to be investigated in accordance with law. As the victim is a member of the ST community and the petitioner, a non member of the SC or ST community, on the nature of the allegations raised, at this CRL.M.C.1393/09 4 stage, before the completion of the investigation, prima facie an atrocity under the Act as covered by the offences imputed cannot be brushed aside. So much so, I find there is no merit in the petition, and it is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. -------------------------------------------------------- CRL.R.P.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- O R D E R --------------------------------------------------------- 23rd March, 2009