The Kerala High Court granted anticipatory bail to Palakkad MLA Rahul Mamkootathil in connection with a rape and miscarriage case registered against him. The order was passed by Justice Kauser Edappagath, who allowed the plea subject to stringent conditions aimed at ensuring the smooth progress of the investigation. The detailed written order is awaited.
The bail application was moved before the High Court after the Sessions Court in Thiruvananthapuram had earlier denied the request for pre-arrest bail. The case has been registered by the Nemom Police, and Mamkootathil is arrayed as the first accused. He faces charges including rape, causing miscarriage without the woman’s consent, voluntarily causing hurt, criminal intimidation, and offences under the Information Technology Act relating to violation of privacy.
According to the prosecution, the complainant alleged that she was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse by the accused, which resulted in pregnancy and a subsequent termination of the pregnancy. It was also alleged that private videos were recorded without her consent and were later used to intimidate her. The complaint further led to the registration of a crime and the commencement of investigation by the police.
While granting anticipatory bail, the High Court imposed several conditions. The applicant has been directed to appear before the investigating officer on a specified date for interrogation and to surrender his mobile phone for the purposes of the investigation. The order permits the investigating officer to interrogate him for specified hours on consecutive days, and during this period he is to be deemed in custody for facilitating investigative procedures, including medical examination or potency testing, if required.
The Court further directed that if the investigating officer decides to formally arrest him after interrogation, he shall be released on bail upon executing a bond of a specified amount. In addition to these conditions, the applicant has been directed to cooperate fully with the investigation and to appear before the investigating officer as and when required.
The bail conditions also stipulate that the applicant shall not commit any offence while on bail and shall not attempt to contact the complainant or any prosecution witnesses. He has been restrained from leaving the State of Kerala without prior permission and has been directed to surrender his passport before the investigating officer. These restrictions were imposed to ensure that there is no interference with the ongoing investigation.
The prosecution opposed the anticipatory bail plea and presented the allegations as serious in nature. The State contended that the charges involve grave offences and that the custodial interrogation of the accused was necessary. The Court, however, granted relief while incorporating safeguards to address the concerns of the investigating agency.
The accused, in his plea, denied the allegations and contended that the relationship between him and the complainant was consensual. He asserted that the complaint was politically motivated and filed with the intention of damaging his reputation and career. The Court noted the rival submissions while deciding on the bail application.
Earlier in the proceedings, interim protection from arrest had been granted to the applicant while the anticipatory bail plea was under consideration. During this period, coercive steps against him had been stayed. The High Court’s present order granting anticipatory bail follows these interim protections and supersedes the earlier rejection of bail by the Sessions Court.
It was also brought to the Court’s notice that additional complaints had been filed by other women alleging similar offences. The prosecution sought to place reliance on these allegations as criminal antecedents. The Court observed during earlier hearings that final investigative reports in those matters would be necessary before such allegations could be treated as established antecedents.
By imposing stringent conditions such as surrender of the mobile phone, restriction on travel, prohibition on contacting the complainant, and mandatory cooperation with interrogation, the High Court sought to balance the personal liberty of the accused with the requirements of a fair and effective investigation. The order ensures that the investigation continues without obstruction while granting protection from arrest subject to compliance with the specified terms.
The matter remains under investigation, and further proceedings are expected in accordance with law.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.