IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6827 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.445/06 OF THOPPUMPADY POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED NO.3: --------------------------------- MEERANKUNHI, S/O.EBRAHIM HAJI, ANSARI MANZIL, CHOOKRIKADA, MANGALPADI P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHAIJAN C.GEORGE SRI.JOHN VIPIN SMT.SAJITHA GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/11/2009, ALONG WITH BA NO. 6494 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.Nos.6827 & 6494 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of November, 2009 ORDER The petitioner in Bail Application No.6827 of 2009 is Meerankunhi, accused No.3 while the petitioner in Bail Application No.6494 of 2009 is A.S.Usman, accused No.5 in the case. 2. The offences alleged against the accused persons are under Sections 342, 376 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The third accused was arrested on 23.10.2009 while the fifth accused was arrested on 26.10.2009. They are in judicial custody. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is the following: Two house wives belonging to Thoppumpady were made to believe that they would be provided a job in Dubai as hospital cleaners on attractive salary. One Azeez, the first accused made these two women believe so. Money was collected from these women and with the help of the fifth accused Usman, the women were sent to Dubai via, Oman. At first, the women were proposed to be sent in a flight from Chennai Airport. That did not succeed as BA Nos.6494 & 6827/2009 2 the travelling documents were not fully correct. Later, Usman tried to send them from Karipur Airport, Calicut. That also did not succeed. Due to the concerted effort of Usman, the two women were sent abroad from International Airport, Thiruvananthapuram. They were trained by Azeez to disclose at Oman Airport that their husbands were employed in Dubai and that they were going to join their husbands in Dubai. They said so at Oman Airport and they were sent to Dubai. Accused No.2 Nazeer and accused No.3 Meerankunhi @ Rafeeq took them to a residential flat owned by accused No.4 Khader. The women were given soft drink. After taking the soft drink, the women became unconscious. They were subjected to rape. Later, they were detained in that flat and in another flat and they were subjected to rape indiscriminately by more than 500 persons on the succeeding days. One of the persons who came to the flat offered the women a mobile phone and they were directed to break open the lock and somehow escape and contact Indian Association in Dubai. Finally, the two women could break open the door and they escaped with the help of the members of Indian Association and the Indian Embassy. They come back to India. BA Nos.6494 & 6827/2009 3 4. It is alleged that on one occasion the women resisted and asked accused Nos.2 to 4 to connect them over phone with Azeez. Azeez was called over phone and the women were directed to talk to him. Azeez told the women to obey accused Nos.2 to 4. Thereafter, accused Nos.2 to 4 disclosed that they had paid huge sum to Azeez for procuring the women and they would not leave the women without making a profit out of the deal. One of the women was threatened to death by leaving her in a desert. It is stated that one of the women became a mentally ill person on account of the heinous sexual abuse by hundreds of persons. 5. Accused No.3 Rafeeq is also known as Meerankunhi. He was actively involved in detaining the women and providing access to others for committing forced sex on the women. It is also alleged that Meerankunhi also committed rape of the women. I do not find any ground to release Meerankunhi, the third accused at this point of time. The investigation is not complete. It is suspected that Meerankunhi is holding more than one Indian passport. Some discrepancies were noticed by the investigating officer in the passport seized from Meerankunhi. The investigation of the case is in progress. If accused No.3 is BA Nos.6494 & 6827/2009 4 released on bail, it would affect the smooth investigation of the case. It is also likely that the third accused may make himself scarce. The chance of the third accused tampering with the evidence or intimidating or influencing the witnesses also cannot be ruled out, as rightly submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. The position of accused No.5 is different. He is accused of making all arrangements for sending the women to Dubai. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that apart from the alleged complicity of accused No.5 in sending the women to Dubai, there is nothing to indicate that he had tried to have sexual contact with these women, in spite of the fact that Usman is alleged to have taken the women to Chennai, Thiruvananthapuram and other places. Nowhere, it is stated by the women that they were sexually abused by Usman, the fifth accused. The counsel also pointed out that there is nothing to indicate that Usman was aware of the guilty intention of the other accused of subjecting the women to rape by hundreds of persons. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined, prima facie, to accept the contention of the fifth accused in this regard. Therefore, I am of the view that the fifth BA Nos.6494 & 6827/2009 5 accused can be released on bail. For the aforesaid reasons, Bail Application No.6827 of 2009 is dismissed. Bail Application No.6494 of 2009 is allowed in the following manner: The petitioner (fifth accused) shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II Kochi, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on every Monday, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. Bail Application No.6827 of 2009 is dismissed and Bail Application No.6494 of 2009 is allowed in the manner indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl