IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 24TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 76 of 2009() -------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.443/2008 OF VAZHAKULAM POLICE STATION) .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------- SADASIVAN, AGED 34, S/O. GOPALAN, KAKKARAYANICKAL HOUSE, PINAVOORKUDY KARA, KUTTAMPUZHA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BIJIMON C.CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFICER, VAZHAKULAM,REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 76 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 13th day of February, 2009 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under section 376 IPC. According to prosecution, de facto complainant was working in Amrita Hospital. Petitioner went to the hospital and stated that her father is sick and she was taken to a lodge at Vazhakulam and rape was committed on her. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner has not committed any offence. He is the friend of de facto complainant's father. On that day he was going to Thodupuzha to meet his son in the boarding house. At that time de facto complainant's father gave some sweets and other articles to be handed over to de facto complainant and he went there and gave the articles. But later, on the same day, de facto complainant was missing, when telephone call was made to her by her father. To give an excuse, she gave a false complaint against petitioner, it is submitted. 4. It is also submitted that name of petition is shown as “Sivan”, but petitioner's name is “Sadasivan”. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that the incident allegedly occurred on 6-11-2008 in the night, but she gave a complaint only on 8- BA 76/2009 -2- 11-2008. He also submitted that age of the girl is shown as 19 in the First Information Statement. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as per the allegations made, she was raped by petitioner on 6-11-2008 and she had given reason for the delay in lodging the complaint. To the doctor also she had made allegation that she was sexually assaulted. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as per the school register, the age of the girl is 16 ½ years. 6. On hearing both sides, considering the serious nature of the allegations made, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner. However, if petitioner has good ground to get bail, on facts, under section437 Cr.P.C., this order will not stand in the way of granting the same. Petitioner is bound to surrender and co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the following order is passed:- 1) Petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer without any delay and co- operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. 2) No further application for anticipatory bail by BA 76/2009 -3- petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this Court, since on the facts in this case, this Court ordered that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail and any order to the contrary in any subsequent anticipatory bail application will amount to review, which is impermissible in law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.