IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2009 / 23RD POUSHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5832 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.161/2008 OF MAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE (VACATION COURT) PETITIONER/FIRST ACCUSED -------------------------------------------- MUJEEB, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED.PK, PERIYANGADU THADAYIL HOUSE, CHERUKULATHUR, PERUVAYAL AMSOM, KOZHKODE. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM SMT.KOCHUMOL KODUVATH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE.REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 5832 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 13th day of January,2009 O R D E Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under section 376 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner who is the neighbour of de facto complainant committed rape on de facto complainant on 4- 6-2008. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the alleged rape was committed on 4-6-2008 and de facto complainant lodged a First Information Statement only on 23-7- 2008 and there is a long delay in filing the same. It is also submitted that on 4-6-2008, the alleged date of occurrence de facto complainant's father lodged a complaint against petitioner, his father and his brother alleging assault against him and other members of the family. In that complaint the allegation of rape is missing. Therefore, the present complaint is made without any basis at a belated stage, it is submitted. 4. It is also pointed out that two families of de facto complainant and accused are not in good terms and this is an admitted fact and, therefore, a false complaint is filed against petitioner. It is also submitted that medical evidence also will BA 5832/08 -2- belie the case of a rape. De facto complainant was examined by the doctor only on 23-7-2008 much after the alleged rape. 5. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that delay in lodging the First Information Statement is explained in the First Information Statement itself. That by itself itself will explain the omission about the rape in the complaint lodged on 4-6-2008. It is pointed out that at the time of examination by the doctor, de facto complainant specifically made allegations against petitioner having committed rape and that there is nothing in the medical report to negative the case of rape. Merely on the ground of delay the case of the de facto complainant cannot be rejected and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail at this stage, it is submitted. 6. On hearing both sides, considering the mere delay in lodging the complaint and the omission to make a complaint regarding rape in a complaint filed by father on 4-6-2008 alone I do not find it fit to grant anticipatory bail. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that in the nature of the allegations made it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Crime was registered as early as on 23-8-2008 and petitioner has not surrendered before the police or before the court. BA 5832/08 -3- Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Magistrate court concerned or before the Investigating Officer without any delay and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.