IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 9073 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.549/2011 OF VARAPUZHA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED : -------------------------- ABDUL RAHMAN @ BECHU RAHMAN, AGED 48 YEARS,301/A,VNR COMPLEX, YESWANTHAPURA, BANGALORE 560 028. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV.T.P. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR,VARAPUZHA POLICE STATION,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 683 517. 2. STATE, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.RASHEED THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.9073 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.33 in Crime No.549 of 2011 of Varapuzha Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 366A, 372, 373, 354, 376 and 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. On 4.8.2011 at 9.30 P.M., the Circle Inspector of Police, North Parur received information that immoral activities are going on in a house at Olanadukara, within the limits of Varapuzha Police Station. The Circle Inspector and party went to the spot. They found the victim, Binil and Jayarajan Nair engaged in immoral activities in the house. They were arrested. Crime No.549 of 2011 was registered for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act. BA 9073/11 2 At that time, the police was under the impression that the victim in the present case was also an accused involved in the offence under the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act. Investigation revealed that the victim girl was subjected to flesh trade even at the time when she was studying in the 10th standard by none other than her sister and brother-in-law with the connivance of the victim's father and mother. Investigation also revealed that the first accused Sobha John procured the victim girl by purchase from Kasaragod and the girl was taken to several places and she was subjected to sexual intercourse by the various accused persons. The father, mother, sister and brother-in-law of the victim are also made accused in the case. Among the array of accused, there are assistants, aides and confidants of Sobha John and persons who are involved in the sex racket and also customers. The victim girl is at present in the Child Welfare Home. 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is a close associate and confidant of accused No.1 Sobha John. It is alleged that the petitioner was responsible for subjecting the victim girl to sexual abuse by several persons at different places, BA 9073/11 3 while acting as the associate of accused No.1 Sobha John. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that he is one of the accused persons in another case which is popularly known as “Thanthri case”. The petitioner was arrested on 6.10.2011 and he was remanded to judicial custody. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was arrested from Bangalore on 4.10.2011. For the purpose of disposal of this Bail Application, it is not necessary to decide whether the petitioner was arrested on 4.10.2011 or 6.10.2011. 5. The allegations made against the petitioner are very grave in nature. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. The criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the mode of committing the crime in the present case and the association of the petitioner with accused No.1 Sobha John, who is involved in several criminal cases, also would indicate that it would not be safe to release the petitioner on bail at this stage. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that BA 9073/11 4 the petitioner is suffering from heart ailments. He relied on Annexure A2 to show that the petitioner had underwent coronary angiogram and angioplasty on 23.4.2010. The counsel also submitted that the petitioner is also taking medicines. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. However, sufficient medical attention should be given to the petitioner in jail, taking into account his illness. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl