High Court Kerala High Court

Babu vs State Of Kerala on 16 April, 2010

Kerala High Court
Babu vs State Of Kerala on 16 April, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 2164 of 2010()


1. BABU,S/O.RAHAMATHULLA, PAYYAMPILLI
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VELLAYANI SUNDARARAJU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN

 Dated :16/04/2010

 O R D E R
                     V.K. MOHANAN, J.
              ----------------------------------------
            Bail Application No.2164 of 2010
              -----------------------------------------
          Dated this the 16th day of April, 2010

                           O R D E R

This is an application for regular bail filed by the

petitioner, who is accused in Crime No. 274/2010 of

Kunnamkulam Police Station, in which offences under

Section 376(g) of C.P.C. is involved.

2. The prosecution case is that, the petitioner is the

proprietor of a video shop named SA-AS Communications,

Mazhuvancherry. The decato complainant was working as a

sales girl in the Joy Alukkas Show room, Kollam. She

became friendly with the petitioner on visiting his shop how

and then and the petitioner borrowed money from the

defacto complainant. The petitioner and 4 others have

committed rape to the defacto complainant between

30.8.2008 to 28.1.2010.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner

and also the learned Public Prosecutor.

B.A.No.2164 of 2010
-:2:-

5. The petitioner is arrested only on 3.3.2010. The

investigation in this case is in progress. Considering the

nature of the offences involved in the case, I am not

inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage,

especially since the release of the petitioner at this stage is

likely to affect the investigation adversely and there is no

guarantee that he would not influence the witnesses and

interfere with the investigation.

In the result, there is no merit in the petition for bail

and accordingly, the same is dismissed.

V.K.MOHANAN,
JUDGE
ami/