Petitioner is the 59th accused in Crime No.111/2011 of CB CID HHW-II, Ernakulam (Crime No.346/2011 of North Paravur Police Station). The offences alleged against the accused therein including the petitioner herein are punishable under Secs.366A, 354, 342, 323, 372, 373, 376 (ii)(g), 376, 511 of 376, 377, 506(i) and 106 r/w 34 of IPC and Secs.4, 5 and 6 of ITP Act and Sec.23 of Juvenile Justice Act.
2. The crime was registered on 7.3.2011 based on the statement given by the minor girl aged 16 years that she was raped by several persons including the petitioner herein from different places since March 2009. It is alleged that her own father compelled the victim girl to have sexual intercourse with other persons. The investigation was conducted by several police officers. Charge sheets were filed against some of the accused persons and the accused in some of the cases were convicted by the learned Sessions Judge. A direction was issued by this Court that the investigation shall be completed and charge sheet shall be filed at the earliest. Recently, as per order dated 11.4.2014, this Court allowed the investigation to be headed by Sri.K.G.Simon, Superintendent of Police, CB CID, HHW- II, Ernakulam. It was stated that altogether 105 accused were arrested. Among them, petitioner is A59.
3. Petitioner has been in custody from 22.4.2014.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will abide by any condition and that he will not leave the country and so, he may be granted bail.
5. This request is strongly opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor stating that once the accused is granted bail he will abscond and will sabotage the investigation and prosecution. It is stated that this petitioner is also a highly influential person. It was observed earlier that the victim girl herself had filed complaints before this Court stating that as the investigation and trial is not over she is put to unnecessary hardship. She is now detained in Juvenile home. Specific allegations are there to show that the accused had sexual intercourse with the victim girl without her consent.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that it is a case of brutal trafficking of a minor girl and she was sexually exploited and abused by the accused persons including the petitioner herein. It is also stated that in this sex racket case, accused persons of this State and other States are also involved. The investigation is still pending. Learned Public Prosecutor points out that while petitions pertaining to this crime were heard earlier it was reported by the learned Sessions Judge that the trial could not be proceeded with in some cases since the accused persons who were granted bail jumped bail and were absconding. It was complained of by the victim girl that if the accused absconds, she has to be separately examined again when each of the accused appears and if so, it will take several years to complete the trial. Therefore, if the accused is released that would certainly hamper the speedy trial, which is absolutely necessary in this case. The contention that there is no material against this petitioner cannot be accepted.
7. The prosecution contends that the accused was absconding and that was why, he could not be apprehended earlier. It is stated that he was employed abroad and so, he will certainly leave this country and would scuttle the prosecution against him.
8. The nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the materials collected in support of the allegations and the reasonable apprehension of the accused tampering the evidence and the apprehension of threat to the complainant are matters to be gone into while considering the application for bail. The materials available on record would prima facie show that there is merit in the complaint lodged by the complainant.
9. The prosecution contends that the accused is a powerful person who would interfere in the course of investigation and would tamper with evidence and threaten or terrorise the witnesses and would hamper smooth investigation. The contention raised by the prosecution that there is likelihood of the accused fleeing to another country or making himself scarce by going underground or becoming unavailable to the investigating agency also cannot be ignored. Considering all these aspects, I am not inclined to grant bail to the accused at this stage. It is hence dismissed.
10. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the mother of the accused expired and on the 41st/42nd day of the death of his mother, some rituals/ ceremonies are to be performed there and so, the petitioner may be granted bail. I cannot accede to that submission. If the petitioner wants to participate in the particular ritual, namely; the 41st/42nd day of the death of his mother then, the jail authorities will make arrangements to enable the petitioner to participate in that function on that day but it should be ensured that the accused/petitioner does not escape from custody.
Sd/- N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.
Jvt /true copy/ P.A. To Judge