IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2011 / 18TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 7639 of 2011 CRIME NO.621 OF 2011 OF VIDHURA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- VISHNU,S/O.RAMESH CHANDRA BABU, ATTINPURAM,PEPPARAKONAM, VITHURA,TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIDHURA POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 7639 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 10th day of October, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.621 of 2011 of Vidhura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 376, 323 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. The prosecution case is the following: The accused belongs to Ezhava community. He is a salesman in a toddy shop. The de facto complainant belongs to a Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner promised to marry the de facto complainant and took her to a lonely place, kept her under BAIL APPL.NO.7639 OF 2011 :: 3 :: confinement in an abandoned house and sexually abused her. It is also alleged that the petitioner misappropriated a sum of `1,60,000/- and the gold ornaments belonging to the de facto complainant. Later, she was assaulted and kicked out of the house by the petitioner. 4. Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act provides that Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be invoked by an accused in a case where offence under the Act is alleged. In the present case, serious allegations have been made against the petitioner. Prima facie, it cannot be said that the offence under the Act has not been made out. 5. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely BAIL APPL.NO.7639 OF 2011 :: 3 :: affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/