SANTHOSH MADHEVAN Vs. C I OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A girl aged 14 years is the alleged victim in this case. She belongs to a financially poor family. When she failed in VIIIth standard, she could not pursue her studies. On knowing that the petitioner is running a hostel for such children by giving all financial aid, affording boarding facilities also, she joined petitioner's hostel and continued the studies, under his care and protection. After the results were out, she was residing with her parents and she was called by the petitioner to his flat. She was taken to the residential flat of the petitioner by his driver, from there, she was allegedly raped by the petitioner at the age of 14 years. She was procured for that purpose by the second accused who was his driver.

(2.) The first incident occurred in May 2006. She was again taken to the flat and rape was committed on her by the petitioner on about six occasions totally. The rape scenes were videographed and video cassettes were seized from the locker of the petitioner in the bank, pursuant to confession statement given to the police. Since the petitioner used to threaten the child, stating that her naked photos were taken, she did not divulge the matter to anybody, for fear of being exposed. But, when the media started reporting about petitioner's criminal activities, she took courage to go to the police station along with her mother and gave a statement to the police on 13-5-2008. Thus, a crime was registered against the petitioner and his driver under Sections 366A, 376 and 34 of Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Petitioner was arrested in connection with another crime and his arrest was recorded in this case also. He is in judicial custody. He seeks bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel for petitioner, Sri. S. Gopakumaran Nair submitted that the petitioner was taken into custody on 13-5-2008 and he is in custody for the past 77 days. He also submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the allegations made and the present complaint is cooked up at the instance of certain persons who are motivated against the petitioner, who could procure and plant the de facto complainant as a victim of rape. It was pointed out that petitioner was arrested at 9 am on 13-5-2008 and within one hour, at 10 am, the girl was at the Police Station with her mother, to lodge the present complaint. Even before the news of arrest reached his counsel, the girl had reached the station and given the complaint. This very circumstance will indicate that everything was stage-managed and she was only a planted victim, who filed a false complaint against the petitioner.