Bail Appl. Nos. 4923, 4923, 5080, 5172, 5360, 5551, 5710, 5727 of 2011. Case: Manaf, S/o Muhammed Vs State. High Court of Kerala (India)
| Case Number | Bail Appl. Nos. 4923, 4923, 5080, 5172, 5360, 5551, 5710, 5727 of 2011 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Anil K. Mohammed, Adv. |
| Judges | K.T. Sankaran, J. |
| Issue | Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act - Section 23; Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) - Sections 164 and 439; Indian Penal Code - Sections 34, 202, 342, 354, 366A, 372, 373, 376(2) and 506 |
| Judgement Date | August 01, 2011 |
| Court | High Court of Kerala (India) |
Judgment:
K.T. Sankaran, J., (At Ernakulam)
-
These Bail Applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by accused Nos. 35, 29, 17, 43, 37, 38, 39 and 51 in CBCID Crime No. 111/CR/HHWII/EKM/11 (North Paravoor Police Station Crime No. 346 of 2011). The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 366-A, 354, 372, 373, 376 (2) (g), 506 (i), 342 and 202 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.
-
The details regarding the name of the accused, his rank as an accused, his date of arrest and the Bail Application number are shown in the table below:
Sl. No.
Name of the accused
Rank
Date of arrest
Bail Application
1
Manaf
35
12-5-2011
B.A. 4923 of 2011
2
ManojGopi
29
08/06/11
B.A. 5080 of 2011
3
Manikantan
17
13-6-2011
B.A. 5172 of 2011
4
Muhammad Salih
43
28-6-2011
B.A. 5360 of 2011
5
Unnikrishnan
37
11-6-2011
B.A. 5551 of 2011
Noby
38
11-6-2011
6
Thomas Varghese
39
26-6-2011
B.A. 5710 of 2011
7
P.R. Manu
51
04/07/11
B.A. 5727 of 2011
-
The gist of the prosecution case is the following: The victim, a girl aged below 16 years, was taken to several places within the State and in the neighbouring States under force and threat and she was compelled to have sexual intercourse with several persons against her will and without her consent for the period from 3-5-2010. The First Information Statement was given by the victim on 7-3-2011. The father of the victim is a real estate broker and a person who supplies junior artists to film makers. On 3-5-2010, the victim was taken by her father to a hotel at Panampilly Nagar, Ernakulam, stating that they had to meet `film people'. After leaving the victim in the room in the hotel, father of the victim left the place. The victim was raped by the man who was in the room. Thereafter, on that date and on the following days, she was taken to several places in and around Ernakulam city, Mysore, Ooty, Thiruvananthapuram, Kannur, Chalakkudy, Athirappilly, Munnar, Bangalore, Thrissur, Mapranam, Coimbatore etc. On 1-1-2011, the father of the victim took her to Coimbatore and entrusted her to a man and woman.They took the victim to a house where she was locked. She was subjected to forceful sex by twelve persons who visited the house. The victim escaped from that house and after reaching her native place, she disclosed the matters to her paternal uncle and other relatives. They advised the victim to inform the matter to the police.
-
The victim stated in the First Information Statement that her father used to entrust her with some brokers. The mother of the victim, though initially opposed the misdeeds of her husband, she was silenced by meting out cruelty to her by her husband. The father of the victim also threatened and terrorized the victim and her brother. On one occasion, the victim was taken by his father to Varapuzha bridge and he threatened that the victim would be thrown to the river. The father used to hang the brother of the victim upside down on the fan to pressurize the victim to go for sex work. The victim also stated in the First Information Statement that her father used to give her pills to prevent pregnancy. The victim had even to undergo treatment in two hospitals as a result of subjecting her to excessive sexual intercourse. The victim stated that her father used to receive money for presenting her to several persons.
-
Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.
-
The allegation against Accused No. 35 Manaf (Petitioner in B.A.
No. 4923 of 2011) is that he, with the help of accused No. 2 Biju, took the victim to several places and had sexual intercourse with her. Biju had contacts with the victim since two years. Biju was the Assistant film Director and also the production controller of the film "Pramani".
-
Manoj Gopi, accused No. 29 (Petitioner in B.A. No. 5080 of 2011) took the victim to Tatapuram Guest House and he had sexual contact with her. The first accused Sudheer (father of the victim)...
To continue reading
Request your trial