IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 8TH MAY 2009 / 18TH VAISAKHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2343 of 2009() ------------------------------------------ CRIME NO.173/2009 OF ARYANADU POLICE STATION ..... PETITIONER (S) /ACCUSED. --------------------------------------- VINOD, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. WILSON, THANKOM BHAVAN, AATTINKOODU, KOTTAKAKOM MURI, VITHURA, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.BLAZE K.JOSE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT. --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARYANADU POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTORMR.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No. 2343 OF 2009 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 8th day of May, 2009 O R D E R A boy of 22 years, who is the accused in Crime No.173/2009 of Aryanadu Police Station alleging commission of offences punishable under sections 376 and 366 IPC is the petitioner herein. The said crime was registered initially under the caption “woman missing” at the instance of the father of the missing girl. Subsequently, the petitioner was arrested on 1.4.2009 along with the missing girl and thereafter the crime was converted as one under sections 376 and 366 IPC and the alleged girl was produced before the learned Magistrate and the Magistrate has recorded her statement. Annexure-1 is the said statement. It reveals that according to her, she went with him on her own free will and they were in love. She categorically stated that none had kidnapped her and she had no complaint against anyone. Her parents were present at the court and she expressed her readiness and willingness to go with them and accordingly she was sent with them. However, the petitioner, who was arrested on BA.2343/09 : 2 : 1.4.2009, was remanded to judicial custody. In view of Annexure- 1 statement and the subsequent development as is evident from Annexure-2, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner/accused may be enlarged on bail. It is also submitted that Annexure-3 would reveal that as on the date of occurrence the victim had crossed the age of 16 and she was capable of giving consent. I do not go into the merits of these submissions. However, for the limited purpose of considering the question whether the petitioner can be enlarged on bail, these facts were taken into account. 2. In the said circumstances expatiated above and taking into account the fact that the petitioner/accused has been under judicial custody since 1.4.2009, I think the petitioner can be enlarged on bail with conditions. 3. Accordingly, this application is allowed with the following conditions: i) The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the BA.2343/09 : 3 : satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. ii) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer as and when his presence is required by the concerned investigating officer. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) aks