Riyas vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 6 in Crime No.467 of 2020 of Bekal Police Station alleging offences under sections 342, 323, 324, 326, 365 and section 34 of the Indian penal Code, 1860.

According to the prosecution, on 30.08.2020, the first accused kidnapped the defacto complainant and after confining him in a rented building, he along with accused Nos.2 to 7 brutally assaulted the defacto complainant with wooden logs and compelled the defacto complainant to accept his and another person's illicit relationship with the sixth accused, and in the assault, serious injuries including fracture of the leg were inflicted on the defacto complainant and thereby the accused committed the offences alleged. The defacto complainant is alleged to have suffered three fractures on the right hand and right leg while the other person by name Muneer also suffered minor injuries.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that during the pendency of this bail application, he had relinquished his engagement for petitioners 1, 3 and 4 and therefore the counsel confined his arguments to petitioners 2, 5 and 6. It was submitted that petitioners 1, 3 and 4 were later learnt to have raped the sixth petitioner for which separate crimes have been registered and hence there is a conflict of interest between petitioners 1, 3 and 4 on the one side and petitioners 2, 5 and 6 on the other side. The third petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No. 41/2021 while the fourth petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No. 42/2021 both of Bakel Police Station.

Sri.V.Vinay, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the allegations against petitioners 2, 5 and 6 are false and the same has been alleged only to avoid the complicity of the defacto complainant in the brutal rape and sexual exploitation by various persons during the period from April, 2016 onwards. It was pointed out that the sixth petitioner, who is the wife of the second petitioner, was subjected to series of rape, orchestrated by one Sri.Thufail, after blackmailing her and forcefully drugging her. The learned counsel also pointed out that the Investigating Officer delayed registration of the crime and manipulated even the first information statement given by the victim in Crime No.468 of 2020. The aforesaid manipulations were done to create an impression that the allegation of rape, which is the subject matter of Crime No.468 of 2020, was subsequent to the allegation of assault and injury in the present crime. Learned counsel also pointed out that the injuries alleged to have been caused to the defacto complainant are either self inflicted or inflicted at the behest of some other persons and not by petitioners 2, 5 and 6 and therefore, the said petitioners ought to be granted anticipatory bail.

Sri.K.A.Noushad, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that serious injuries had been inflicted on the defacto complainant and therefore custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary.

The facts of this case reveal certain disturbing circumstances. The defacto complainant and few other persons are alleged to have raped the sixth petitioner and is alleged to be one of those instrumental in threatening and blackmailing her and creating situations opportune, for committing rape on the sixth petitioner. Though there are serious allegations of rape against the defacto complainant, that does not give right upon the petitioners to assault him. Taking note of the nature of injuries caused including the three fractures and considering the allegations, I am of the view that petitioners 1 to 5 are required to be subjected to custodial interrogation. The said interrogation is essential to unravel the truth of the allegations. However, as regards the sixth petitioner, since she is a victim in Crime No.468 of 2020 of Bekal Police Station, I am of the view that subjecting her to further custodial interrogation in this crime would be like 'rubbing salt into the wound'.

In view of the above consideration, this bail application as far as petitioners 1 to 5 shall stand dismissed. The bail application as far as the sixth petitioner, who is the victim in Crime No.468 of 2020 of Bekal Police Station, shall stand allowed on the following conditions:

a) Sixth petitioner shall be released on bail on her executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum if she is arrested by the police in connection with this case.

b) Sixth petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation if she is so required in writing and shall co-operate with the investigation.

c) Sixth petitioner shall not destroy or tamper with the evidence or intimidate or threaten or contact the defacto complainant.

d) Sixth petitioner shall not commit any other similar offences while she is on bail.

e) Sixth petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

In case of violation of  any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.