The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.328/2014 of Kambalakkad Police Station in Wayanad District registered for offences punishable under Sections 450 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, offence under Section 363 and 506 (1) of the Indian Penal Code have also been added in the above crime. 2. The gist of the prosecution case is that on 6/8/2014 at about 11.30 a.m., the petitioner had committed rape on the defacto complainant, who is a married lady aged 38 years, by trespassing into the quarters where she is residing with her family. During the investigation, the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 8/8/2014 and has been under custodial detention for the last 88 days.
3. Sri.Mathew Kuriakose learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that investigation is completed and the benefit of the regular bail may be granted to the petitioner as he has already been under the custodial detention for the last more than 88 days and that further custodial investigation is not required as the investigation is completed long ago.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that investigation is almost completed and the final formalities for submission of the final report will be completed shortly and in case this Court is inclined to grant benefit of regular bail to the petitioner, then stringent conditions may be imposed, so that the petitioner does not have any access to the defacto complainant as otherwise he is likely to threating or intimidating her or other persons concerned.
5. After hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and on evaluation of the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is inclined to hold that, as the investigation is almost completed and the petitioner has been under judicial custody for the last 88 days, the benefit of regular bail can be granted to him, but only on stringent conditions so as to ensure that the petitioner does not have any access to the defacto complainant and so as to avoid any possibility of his threatening or intimidating her or any other witness in the locality.
6. Accordingly, it is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court below concerned and on subject to the following conditions;
i). Petitioner shall not enter or reside within the territorial limits of the Taluk concerned within whose area the de facto complainant is residing until the conclusion of the trial except for the purpose of compliance with the other conditions in the order.
ii). The Investigating Officer shall depute a woman police constable (not in uniform) to the residence of the defacto complainant for a period of six months from today so as to ascertain from her as to whether she is facing any threating or disturbing action from the petitioner. If the Investigating Officer, after conducting due enquiries, is convinced about the correctness of such allegation raised in that regard, then he shall file an appropriate report and necessarily application in this process before this Court for cancellation of the bail granted to the petitioner. It is further ordered that after such assessment, if the investigating officer feels that the practice of deputing a woman police constable after 6 months need not be continued, he is at liberty to do so. But, if he finds that this practice should be continued for a further period, he is at liberty to do so also.
iii) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the jurisdictional Magistrate concerned within three days from the execution of the bail bond before the Investigating Officer and if he is not a holder of passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect in the said court. If the petitioner requires his passport in connection with his travel abroad, then he shall approach the court concerned for the release of the same and for necessary permission in that regard. In case such an application is filed, the trial court or the jurisdictional Magistrate concerned, as the case may be, is free to consider the same on merits and to pass appropriate orders thereon, taking necessary guidance from the principles laid down in the decision of this Court in the case Asok Kumar v State of Kerala, (2009(2) KLT 712), notwithstanding the aforementioned conditions imposed by this Court.
iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal offence of similar or graver nature.
v) The petitioner shall not influence the witnesses or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner whatsoever.
vi) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation and report before the Investigating Officer as and when required by him.
If the petitioner fails to comply with any of the aforementioned conditions, the bail granted to him is liable to be cancelled.
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.
dpk