Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE30H DAYOF JANUARY201410TH MAGHA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 614 of 2014 ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 802/2013 OF PALLICKATHODE POLICE STATION , KOTTAYAM .. PETITIONER(S)/1ST ACCUSED:: ----------------------------------------------- NITHIN THOMAS,AGED30YEARS, S/O.E.A.THOMAS, ERATTAYANICKAL HOUSE, ANICADU. BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALLICKATHODE POLICE STATION, PALLICKATHODE P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 001. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. S. HYMA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON3001-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.
========================= Bail Application No. 614 of 2014 ============================ Dated this the 30th day of January, 2014 ORDER
Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No. 802 of 2013 of the Pallickathode police station for the offences punishable under Secs.498A and 313 of the Penal Code. He apprehends arrest and has filed this application.
2. Application is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner subjected the de facto complainant to cruelty demanding more ornaments and money and caused abortion of her pregnancy.
3. Learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true. There were some family problem arising from desire of the de facto complainant to go to Bangalore for her employment. Petitioner was not agreeable for that on account of the tender age of the children.
4. I have gone through the CD file which is given to me for perusal and find treatment certificates dated 09.11.2013 and 17.01.2014 issued by Dr. D. Santhi Bhai and Dr. Santhosh Kumar referring to the alleged abortion of pregnancy. B.A No. 614 of 2014 2 5. Having regard to the circumstances, I am inclined to think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence I am inclined to grant relief but subject to conditions so that investigation of the case is not affected. Application is disposed of as under:
1. Petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No. 802 of 2013 of the Pallickathode police station on 06.02.2014 at 10:00 a.m. for interrogation. 2) In case interrogation is not completed that day, the said officer can direct the petitioner to appear before him on any other date/dates and time which he shall comply. 3) In case the petitioner is arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day. 4) On such production, the petitioner shall be released if not required to be detained otherwise on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions:- B.A No. 614 of 2014 3 a) One of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner. b) Petitioner shall report to the investigating officer on every alternate Saturday between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. for a period of two months or until filing of the final report, whichever is earlier. c) Petitioner shall report to the investigating officer as and when required for interrogation. d) Petitioner shall not intimidate/influence the witnesses. e) Petitioner shall not, during the period of this bail get involved in any offence. f) In case of violation of any of conditions Nos. (b) and (e), bail granted hereby is liable to be cancelled by the investigating officer by moving application before the learned magistrate until committal if any and thereafter before the learned Principal Sessions Judge concerned, as held in P.K. Shaji V. State of Kerala (AIR2006 Supreme Court 100). Sd/- THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE //true copy// P.A. to Judge Smv