IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN SATURDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2011 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8618 of 2011() ---------------------------------- (CRIME NO.698/2011 OF NARAKKAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) ..... PETITIONER --------------- PAULY VALOORAN, AGED 40, S/O.V.P.PAUL, VALURAN HOUSE, NARAKKAL. BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.THOMAS CHAZHUKKARAN SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SRI.P.K.RAKESH KUMAR SMT.M.A.RUXANA RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/FORMAL PARTY ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NARAKKAL POLICE STATION, NARAKKAL. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.REJI JOSEPH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs P.S. GOPINATHAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------------- B.A.No. 8618 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2011 ORDER Read the order dated 1/12/2011. Petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer in compliance to the order dated 1/12/2011. The learned Govt. Pleader submitted that the petitioner appeared and he was interrogated. Thereafter, he was taken to the defacto complainant, who had identified the petitioner as one of the persons who had committed rape on her. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.K.S.Madhusoodanan canvassed my attention to the statements given by the defacto complainant as well as copies of the First Information Statement and to the earlier statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure and submitted that, going by the statements, it is evident that the petitioner was falsely implicated with ulterior motive. He would also submit that petitioner has no name as mentioned by the defacto complainant. Neither he has got a shop or a store room where the defacto complainant was stated to be the place where the alleged rape had occurred. B.A.No.8618 of 2011 2 Therefore, according to the learned counsel, the story is not believable. Having due regard to the entire facts and circumstances and the submissions made by the learned Govt. Pleader and the report of the Investigating Officer, I find that, in this proceedings, it is too premature to go into those details and to arrive at a conclusion while the Investigation is in mid way. In the light of the report stating that the defacto complainant had identified the petitioner, I find that it would not be appropriate to grant the relief sought in the petition. In the result, this petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to apply for regular bail. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE su