IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2009 / 1ST MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 8052 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.448/08 OF ERUMAPETTY POLICE STATION PETITIONER -------------------- JAMALUDHEEN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. KUNHU HYDROSEKUTTY, PALIYATHEZHATH HOUSE, POTHIYAMATHUR DESOM, CHIRAMANGAD VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.P.P.BIJU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSEUCOTR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 8052 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, the alleged victim in this case, who is aged 17 years, was subjected to unnatural offence by petitioner for the past seven years continuously. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is a 70 year old religious leader and the complaint is filed with a view to tarnish his image. Petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made and he is a victim of the wrath of the opposition fraction of a religious group. It is submitted that medical evidence will reveal that petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged. If when an offence of this nature is committed continuously for the past seven years, evidently there must be some physical indication on the body of the victim which will be revealed on examination of the alleged victim by the medical expert. But, to the information of petitioner, medical evidence is in favour of petitioner, it is submitted. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that because of the rivalry, petitioner BA.8052/08 2 was implicated in two cases of similar nature and considering the facts and circumstances, this Court was pleased to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner in the other case. This case is also one under such category. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the doctor was questioned by the investigating officer and that he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to petitioner. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioner and the following order is passed: Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, on the following conditions: i) Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed. ii). Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate any witness or tamper with evidence. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.