IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2008 / 30TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4235 of 2008() ----------------------------- CMP.1541/2008 of J.M.F.C.-II, ERNAKULAM CRIME NO.455/08 OF KADAVATHRA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ----------------- SANTOSH MADHAVAN @ AMRUTHA CHAITHANYA 4B, FLAT ROAYAL STADIUM KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR (SR.) SRI.PRADEESH CHACKO SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTEOR OF POLICE, CENTERAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKUKLAM. BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI. P.G.THAMPI BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.K.SURESH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------------- Bail Appl.No. 4235 of 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of July, 2008. ORDER Petition for bail. 2. The petitioner was taken into custody on 13.5.2008 at 3 p.m. in connection with Crime no.897 of Central Police Station registered under Section 420 IPC on a complaint lodged by a non-resident Indian lady about five year back. Thereafter, a complaint was lodged by de facto complainant, aged 16 years, on 18.5.2008 against petitioner alleging, inter alia, that she belongs to a financially poor family and she was housed in a hostel run by the petitioner and the entire expenses were met by him to pursue her studies. Exploiting the poor financial condition, he promised to arrange a visa and job for her sister abroad and he also met her mother's treatment expenses. Both the girls were procured by petitioner's driver under some pretext or other. On one particular day, in 2006, the petitioner sexually tortured de facto complainant from his flat at the age of 14 years. Thereafter, the acts were repeated on several other occasions also, till April 2008. She did not divulge the details to anybody since petitioner was rich and influential. Later, when news flashed in media about petitioner's [B.A.No.4235/08] 2 criminal activities, a complaint was lodged by de facto complainant on 18.5.2008, after arrest of the petitioner. A crime was registered under Section 336A, 376 and 34 of IPC. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is inordinate delay in lodging the complaint. The incident occurred in 2006 when the girl was only 14 years, but the complaint was lodged only in 2008. The child had not disclosed any details about alleged rape to any person for a considerably long period of 2 years and that present complaint is only a cooked up one. It is submitted that she is planted to fabricate first information statement by persons who are motivated against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody from 13.5.2008 onwards for the past 77 days, though the arrest in this case was recorded only subsequently and hence he requests for bail. 4. Learned Director General of Prosecution Shri.P.G.Thampi vehemently opposed this bail application. It is submitted that the petitioner was actually in the role of a guardian. The parents of a financially poor children left their female children to the care and custody of the petitioner persuaded by his false representations. A hostel was run by the petitioner under the pretext that it was intended for the welfare of the children and by exploiting the helpless position of the relatives of the victim, the petitioner was habitually engaged in sexually abusing girls from his own flat. The de facto complainant in [B.A.No.4235/08] 3 this case is not the sole victim, but there are many other victim also, who were subjected to rape and other crimes. 5. The petitioner is a highly influential person who could successfully evade arrest and legal proceedings for a period of more than 5 years, even though a complaint was lodged against the petitioner as early as in 2003 by a non-resident Indian lady, alleging offence of cheating against him, it is pointed out. The Interpol published the petitioner's photo as a “wanted criminal” and non- bailable warrant as issued against him. Even though the petitioner was very much available in the State and he was freely making public appearance, he was not arrested for a long time because of his influence. Until he was taken into custody by the police on 13.5. 2008, nobody in India dared to file any complaint against the petitioner because of his strong influence. Various video cassettes were recovered in pursuance of the confession statement made by the petitioner from the locker of a bank, including minors. Investigation is not yet over and in case petitioner is released on bail, he will influence the witnesses, tamper with evidence and threaten witnesses and it will adversely affect the investigation, it is submitted. 6. On hearing both sides and on perusal of the case diary, I find that case diary reveals sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner and investigation has to proceed further. There is nothing [B.A.No.4235/08] 4 on record to substantiate petitioner's innocence or alleged false implication at the instance of persons motivated against petitioner. I am satisfied that release of the petitioner at this stage will adversely affect the investigation. Hence, petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.