IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 5382 of 2008()
1. M.USMAN, S/O.LATE MOHAMMADALI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.V.GEORGE
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :07/10/2008
O R D E R
K.HEMA, J.
-------------------------------------------------
B.A.No.5382 of 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of October, 2008
O R D E R
This petition is for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under Sections 420, 342 and
376 IPC. According to prosecution, accused in furtherance of
common intention allegedly cheated two women promising to get
employment abroad. The first accused took Rs.10,000/- each
from the women and the 5th accused, who is the petitioner
herein, arranged visa through the second and the third accused
in Gulf country. He also made arrangements for the alleged
victims to go abroad. On reaching there, the second and the
third accused wrongfully confined them in a room and committed
rape on them. They were also raped by other persons and the
victims approached the Indian Embassy and they managed to
come back to India and lodged a complaint.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no
allegations are made against the petitioner. No offence is made
out against the petitioner. All allegations are made against the
BA No.5382/08 2
first accused and hence, he may be granted anticipatory bail.
4. Learned public prosecutor opposed this bail
application vehemently and submitted that the offence
committed is heinous in nature. The petitioner has direct
knowledge about the persons who have committed rape on the
victims in this case, but, only the names of those persons are
revealed, without the details. Those are yet to be disclosed by
the petitioner. There are many materials within the exclusive
knowledge of the petitioner which can be ascertained only by
interrogation by the police. The petitioner is the person who
arranged visa and also made arrangements for the women to go
abroad. He had direct connection with the persons abroad. If he
is granted anticipatory bail, it will adversely affect the
investigation, it is submitted.
5. On hearing both sides, on considering the serious
nature of offence allegedly committed and also the nature of
investigation required, I find that it is not fit and proper to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The crime is registered as
early as on 15.11.2006, and two years have elapsed and the
petitioner could not arrested so far.
BA No.5382/08 3
Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the
Investigating Officer within ten days from today and
co-operate with the investigation and make himself
available for interrogation by the police.
With this direction, this petition is dismissed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE
csl