High Court Kerala High Court

Sackaria vs State Represented By The Public on 11 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
Sackaria vs State Represented By The Public on 11 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 7289 of 2009()


1. SACKARIA, S/O.YOHANNAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :11/12/2009

 O R D E R
                       K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                -----------------------------------------------
                 B.A.Nos.7289 & 7347 of 2009
                ------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 11th day of December, 2009


                               ORDER

These are applications for bail under Section 439 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner Sackaria is accused

No.3 in both the cases. The offences alleged in Crime No.2105

of 2009 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam are under Section 8

of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Section 366A of the

Indian Penal Code. Originally, the offence under Section 366A

was not there and it was later added. In Crime No.870 of 2009

of Cheranellur Police Station, the offences alleged are under

Sections 372, 373, 376, 366A, 342 and 120B of the Indian Penal

Code. This crime was originally registered as Crime No.2220 of

2009 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam which was transferred

to Cheranellur Police Station where it was re-registered as

Crime No.870 of 2009.

2. The crime was originally registered for the offence

under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, consequent on a

search made in a residential flat at Ernakulam on 22.9.2009. On

such search, the petitioner herein, a woman and another girl

BA Nos.7289 & 7347/2009 2

were found in the flat. They were arrested. The learned

Magistrate before whom the accused persons were produced

thought that the girl had not attained majority and that she was

a victim of the crime. Later, it was revealed that the girl had not

attained majority at the relevant time.

3. The prosecution case is that Soja, Deepu and Sackaria

procured a minor girl and she was subjected to forceful sex by

several persons at different places. It was also alleged that

Sackaria also committed rape on the girl.

4. Lavanya, who was also found in the flat, was granted

bail subsequently as per the order dated 10th November, 2009 in

Bail Application No.6376 of 2009 as she had no role to play in

the offence under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code and

the only allegation against her was that she committed an

offence under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.

5. Bail Application filed by the petitioner as Bail

Application No.6376 of 2009 along with Lavanya, was dismissed

in so far as it related to the petitioner, by the order dated 10th

November, 2009. The petitioner moved another application for

bail as Bail Application No.6813 of 2009 which was also

BA Nos.7289 & 7347/2009 3

dismissed by the order dated 20th November, 2009.

6. The petitioner was arrested on 22.9.2009 in Crime

No.2105 of 2009 and his formal arrest was recorded on

13.10.2009 in Crime No.870 of 2009 of Cheranellur Police

Station. The investigation has progressed after the dismissal of

the earlier Bail Applications.

7. 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 the present stage of

investigation, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the

petitioner on stringent conditions.

The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing

bond for Rs.50,000/- in each case with two solvent sureties for

the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of

the First Class-II, Ernakulam, 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 for a period of two months and thereafter on all
Mondays, 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;

BA Nos.7289 & 7347/2009 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 Applications are allowed as above.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl