IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2009 / 9TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 316 of 2009(B) ----------------------------------- CRIME NO.438/2008 OF VELLIKULANGARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ---------------------------- JOSE, S/O CHACKU, CHERUPARAMBIL HOUSE, VASUPURAM, MATTATHURKUNNU PO KODAKARA, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELLIKULANGARA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. -------------------------------- B.A. No.316 OF 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 376 and 506(1) of I.P.C. According to prosecution, on 11.12.2008, petitioner committed rape on a mentally retarded girl aged 24 years from a property belonging to one Anthony. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that though incident happened on 11.12.2008, the girl informed the matter to her Aunt only on 14.12.2008 and the police was informed only on 24.12.2008. There is a delay and it is fatal. It is also submitted that as per the F.I. Statement, the place of occurrence is the property of one Anthony. But as per the scene mahazar, it is the property of one Jose. On this alleged discrepancies, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that this is a case of rape on a mentally retarded girl. The delay cannot be taken as a significant factor to discard the prosecution case, it is submitted. There is B.A.No.316 of 2009 2 sufficient medical evidence revealed that rape was committed and in a case of this nature, it is not proper to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied of the submissions made by learned Public Prosecutor. The matter requires investigation and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail on the basis of the alleged discrepancies pointed out. Petitioner is required for investigation. Petitioner is directed to surrender 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. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac