IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 7720 of 2009()
1. KOLIYADUKKAM AYISHA @ T.K.AYISHA,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE - REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
... Respondent
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.SASINDRAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :23/12/2009
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------
B.A. No. 7720 of 2009
------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of December, 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.5 in Crime
No. 666/2009 of Kasaragod Police Station.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under
Sections 366A, 376, 506, 511 of 376 and 109 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(xi)(xii)
and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Prevention
of Atrocities Act.
3. The victim is a girl below the age of 16 years. She
belongs to a Scheduled Tribe. She hails from an interior place in
Karnataka State. Her father is no more. Her mother is engaged
in Coolie work. The family of the victim came to Kasaragod in
search of employment. They came to the hands of the 5th
accused Koliyadukkam Ayisha @ T.K. Ayisha. The Victim girl was
brought to the house of Jasmine, the daughter of Ayisha as a
maid servant. There are materials to indicate that in the house
of Jasmine and Ayisha, persons, both men and women, used to
visit.
B.A. No. 7720 of 2009 2
4. The victim was once taken to Mangalore by Ayisha
and Ameer, the 3d accused. They stayed in a lodge. While going
to Mangalore, an unidentified person boarded the car. At
Mangalore, Ayisha and Ameer put the victim in a room and the
unidentified man was allowed to remain in that room. He tried
to have sexual relationship with the girl. She did not agree. The
attempt to commit rape also did not succeed.
5. The girl was taken back to Kasaragod. Again, on
another date, she was taken to Mangalore. By that time, Ayisha
had gained acquaintance with a chronic bachelor, by name,
Ravi Raj Bhat, accused No.6. After taking the girl to Mangalore,
she was forced to remain with Ravi Raj Bhat in a room. Ravi
Raj Bhat committed rape on the victim.
6. Successive incidents of rape continued. Ayisha,
Jasmine, Ameer and others enjoyed in the misery of the girl and
they could make money by subjecting the victim girl to the
atrocities at the hands of influential and powerful persons.
7. The petitioner had filed Bail Application No.6777/2009,
which was dismissed by the order dated 24.11.2009.
8. Later, bail was granted to Raviraj Bhat as per the order
B.A. No. 7720 of 2009 3
dated 08.12.2009 in Bail Application No. 7156/2009 Ameer as
per the order dated 17.12.2009 in Bail Application No.
7432/2009.
9. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the
case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the
petitioner, the nature of the offence and also the fact that Bail
was granted to Ameer and Ravi Raj Bhat, I am of the view that
bail can be granted to the petitioner on stringent conditions.
10. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his
executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each
for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate
of the First Class-I, Kasaragod subject to the following
conditions:-
A) The petitioner shall report before the
Investigating Officer between 9 A.M. and
11 A.M. on every Monday and Thursday,
till the final report is filed or until further
orders.
B) The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer for interrogation as
and when required.
C) The petitioner shall not try to influence
the prosecution witnesses or tamper with
the evidence.
B.A. No. 7720 of 2009 4
D) The petitioner shall not commit any
offence or indulge in any prejudicial
activity while on bail.
E) In case of breach of any of the conditions
mentioned above, the bail shall be liable
to be cancelled.
The Bail Application is allowed as above.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE
ln