IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2009 / 14TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3990 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.612/2009 OF CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION PETITIONER (S): -------------------- SHAHUL HAMEED, AGED 35 YEARS, KALLUVETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, ALWAYE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 3990 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th August, 2009 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.2 in Crime No.612 of 2009 of Chalakkudy Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Sections 384 and 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that the first accused acted as a broker for selling the immovable property of the de facto complainant. In that transaction the de facto complainant got Rs.6 lakhs. He had some cash with him and he decided to purchase another property. The first accused introduced the de facto complainant to the third accused. On 9.6.2009, the first accused took the de facto complainant to the house of the third accused. The second accused, who is allegedly involved in several other cases, is the husband of the third accused. They stated that a girl would be brought there during night. The girl came to the house. The de facto B.A. NO. 3990 OF 2009 :: 2 :: complainant had sexual intercourse with her. It is alleged that the accused persons photographed the same. 4. On 9.6.2009, one Shiju came to the school where the de facto complainant is working. He stated that he came there as directed by the first accused. The de facto complainant was taken to the school ground where the first accused was also there. The scenes in respect of the incident narrated above were shown to the de facto complainant in a camera. The de facto complainant became nervous on seeing the photographs. The de facto complainant was directed to pay a sum of Rs.25 lakhs to the first accused and Shiju. They stated that if they sell the material to Internet, they would get Rs.25 lakhs. The de facto complainant was prepared to pay Rs.2 lakhs, but the accused did not agree. Ultimately, the readiness of the de facto complainant to pay Rs.6 lakhs was accepted by the accused. On 11.6.2009, the de facto complainant paid Rs.6 lakhs. Again he was threatened to pay more amounts. On 12.6.2009, the de facto complainant paid another sum of Rs.2 lakhs. Still, the harassment continued. The de facto complainant was convinced that there would be no end to the black mailing. Ultimately, he was compelled to report the matter to the B.A. NO. 3990 OF 2009 :: 3 :: police. The petitioner was arrested on 23.6.2009 and he is in judicial custody. 5. The investigation of the case is not over. All the accused persons have not been arrested. The entire amount involved in the case is not recovered. Witnesses are to be questioned. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would seriously affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. In my view, the bail cannot be granted to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/