Kochi ,6 December (H.S.):The Kerala High Court on Saturday granted interim protection from arrest to Palakkad MLA Rahul Mamkootathil, who is facing grave charges of rape and forceful abortion in a case registered by the Nemom police. Justice K. Babu issued the interim order while considering Rahul’s anticipatory bail plea, even as the legislator continues to remain untraceable for over a week.

The court has posted the matter for further hearing on December 15, seeking case records and additional documents necessary to evaluate the merits of the plea. The interim protection currently applies only to the Nemom case.

Rahul faces another rape case, registered by the Crime Branch based on a complaint forwarded by KPCC president Sunny Joseph. The fresh complaint, filed by a 23-year-old woman, was escalated to the State Police Chief. The anticipatory bail plea before the High Court does not cover this second FIR. Following Saturday’s interim relief, Rahul also approached the Thiruvananthapuram Principal Sessions Court seeking anticipatory bail in the Crime Branch case.

Rahul moved the High Court after the Thiruvananthapuram Principal Sessions Court denied him pre-arrest bail in the Nemom case, observing that the allegations were “grave in nature.” The District Court noted that the survivor agreed to undergo an abortion only under pressure exerted by Rahul and in the hope of a future with him. The court further held that granting anticipatory bail at this stage would adversely affect the investigation.

In the wake of the Sessions Court order, the Congress expelled Rahul from primary membership, intensifying pressure on him as the case triggered a major political embarrassment for the party. Despite intensified searches, the MLA continues to evade arrest and has reportedly been switching phones and locations to remain undetected.

In his petition before the High Court, Rahul expressed willingness to cooperate with the probe and argued that the complaint was belated and submitted directly to the Chief Minister instead of through proper legal channels. He claimed that the relationship was consensual and that the survivor independently chose to terminate her pregnancy.

Rahul also cast doubt on the second complaint, stating that it lacked essential details such as the name and place of occurrence and that the email ID from which it was sent appeared “suspicious.”

The High Court will scrutinize the case documents next week before deciding on whether to extend or revoke the interim protection granted to the absconding MLA.

---------------

Hindusthan Samachar / Arun Lakshman