Kerala High Court refuses to grant anticipatory bail to expelled Congress councillor accused of rape

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday refused to grant anticipatory bail to expelled Congress municipal councillor from Palakkad, Prashob MA, in a rape case [Prashob M v State of Kerala & anr].

The case involves allegations that he sexually exploited a Dalit woman by promising her employment.

He has been booked for rape related offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) as well as under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).

A Special SC/ST court had earlier denied him anticipatory bail in the case. The trial court had opined that, prima facie, a case had been made out against the expelled councillor. It had, therefore, dismissed his pre-arrest bail plea. 

The High Court has upheld the trial court’s order. Justice A Badharudeen dismissed Prashob MA’s appeal in the matter today.

The criminal case against Prashob MA has been registered at the Palakkad Town South Police Station.

It is alleged that Prashob, despite being married, maintained a relationship with the complainant, a Dalit woman, for over one and a half years, indulging in repeated sexual intercourse with her on the basis of assurances of a job and lifelong support.

It was further alleged that the woman became pregnant during the course of their relationship and that he later intimidated and abused her when the relationship became public.

He was booked for the offences of rape, sexual exploitation on false promise, and criminal intimidation under the BNS, apart from provisions of the SC/ST Act.

After a trial court rejected his anticipatory bail plea in April, Prashob moved the High Court seeking relief. 

He contended that the allegations, even it taken at face value, only revealed a consensual relationship between him and the woman.

He argued that the allegations did not attract the ingredients of the alleged offences under the SC/ST Act and the statutory restrictions on grant of anticipatory bail in SC/ST cases would not apply in this case.

His counsel argued that the Special Court had not made any prima facie finding substantiating the allegation of rape. Its decision was based solely on finding that a prima facie case was made out under the SC/ST Act.

The complainant’s counsel opposed the grant of any relief to the expelled councillor. The complainant said that she met Prashob after Prashob's father, who ran a tea shop, misbehaved with her. Prashob convinced her not to file a complaint and thereafter maintained constant contact with her, promising her a good job and luring her into a sexual relationship, she added. 

Prashob was represented by Senior Advocate Sasthamangalam S Ajithkumar and advocates Sreejith S Nair, Satheesh Mohanan, and Mahima.