High Court Kerala High Court

Vimal Kumar @ Vimal vs State Of Kerala Rep.By Public … on 1 October, 2007

Kerala High Court
Vimal Kumar @ Vimal vs State Of Kerala Rep.By Public … on 1 October, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 5902 of 2007()


1. VIMAL KUMAR @ VIMAL,S/O.MOHANAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                       ...       Respondent

2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR PULINKUNNU POLICE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :01/10/2007

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      B.A.No. 5902 of 2007
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
               Dated this the 1st day of October, 2007

                                O R D E R

Application for regular bail. The petitioner faces allegations,

inter alia, under Sections 452 and 376 I.P.C. The alleged incident

took place on 14.8.2006. The petitioner is a young man aged about

23 years. The victim is a woman aged 45 years and a neighbour of

the petitioner. The victim lady owed certain amounts to the

petitioner. The petitioner was demanding return of the amount. On

the date of the incident, i.e. on 14.8.2006, the petitioner allegedly

demanded return of the amount. The victim was not able to return.

Enraged by that, he allegedly trespassed into the house of the defacto

complainant, threatened her and he allegedly raped her. Hearing her

cries, the local people had assembled. They had taken the victim to

the hospital. There the F.I. statement was lodged and crime was

registered. The petitioner was absconding. Long later, he was

arrested on 14.9.2007. He continues in custody from that date.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent. He has been in custody from

B.A.No. 5902 of 2007
2

14.9.2007. The incident had taken place as early as on 14.8.06. In these

circumstances the petitioner may now be enlarged on bail, prays the learned

counsel.

3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. The allegations

raised are grave and serious. Great depravity of mind is reflected in the

alleged occurrence. Investigation is not complete. The petitioner may not,

in these circumstances, be enlarged on bail, submits the Prosecutor.

4. The petitioner was absconding all along. The investigation

reveals that there are certain antecedents which must also stand in the way

of regular bail being granted to the petitioner at this early stage.

Considering the nature of the crime and antecedents of the petitioner, he

may not be enlarged on bail at this stage, submits the Prosecutor.

3. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I find merit in the

opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am satisfied that the petitioner is

not entitled for bail at this stage. In a serious crime like this the

Investigators may be given sufficient and reasonable time to complete the

investigation as submitted by the Prosecutor.

4. This application is, in these circumstance, dismissed. But I may

hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move the court for

B.A.No. 5902 of 2007
3

bail again at a later stage of the investigation, not at any rate, prior to

15.10.2007. The Investigators shall, in the meantime, make every

endeavour to complete the investigation.

(R. BASANT)
Judge

tm