Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 1194 OF 2024 CRIME NO.04/2024 OF MAHILA DHANA POLICE STATION, JABALPUR, MADHYA PRADESH PETITIONER/ACCUSED: 1 JEES JAMES, AGED 37 YEARS 2 JAMES PHILIP, AGED 65 YEARS VELLOOR HOUSE ,ERIKADU, THAMBALAKKADU P.O ,KANJIRAPPALLY,KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686506 3 MERCY JAMES, AGED 56 YEARS 4 JESVIN JAMES, AGED 24 YEARS KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686506 BY ADVS. SANTHOSH PETER (MAMALAYIL) P.N.ANOOP SMITHA PILLAI M.S.SANDEEP SUDHAKARAN JOBIN GRACE THOMAS RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER , MAHILA DHANA, JABALPUR DISTRICT, MADHYAPRADESH., PIN - 482001 SR.PP-SRI.VIPIN NARAYANAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2.. SOPHY THOMAS, J ========================= Bail.Appl.No.1194 of 2024 ========================== Dated this the 18th day of March, 2024
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr PC filed by accused nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.4/2024 of Mahila Dahana Police Station, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, registered under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. The prosecution allegation is that, the petitioners,
who are the husband and in-laws of the de-facto complainant, subjected her to matrimonial cruelties, demanding more dowry, and committed criminal breach of trust by withholding her jewellery and other valuables.
3. Notice was ordered to the 2nd respondent - Station
House Officer, Mahila Dahana Police Station, Jabalpur district, Madhya Pradesh and learned Public Prosecutor entered appearance on behalf of the 2 nd respondent also, and obtained instructions from the 2nd respondent.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and ..3.. learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit
that, the petitioners are apprehending arrest in Kerala for the crime registered in Madhya Pradesh. In Madhusoodan v. Superintendent Of Police [1992 (2) KLT 83], the Apex Court
held that, the Court within whose jurisdiction the person
apprehends arrest has power to grant the order under Section 438 of Cr PC. Though the crime is registered in Madhya Pradesh, which is outside the territorial limits of this Court, going by the decision Priya Indoria Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors [2023 SCC OnLine SC 1484], this Court is empowered to grant transit bail or protection order for enabling the petitioners to surrender before the jurisdictional court to seek regular/anticipatory bail. Since this being a family dispute, it is all the more necessary to try for an amicable settlement and if the petitioners are sent to jail, that chance will be foreclosed forever. So relying on the decision in Priya Indoria (supra), this Court is inclined to grant transit bail to the petitioners on the following conditions: i. If the petitioners are arrested before 02.05.2024, ..4.. they shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) by each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officers. ii. The petitioners are directed to approach the jurisdictional court in Madhya Pradesh on or before 02.05.2024 to seek anticipatory/regular bail. iii. The petitioners shall not leave the limits of India till 02.05.2024. With these directions, this bail application stands disposed of. Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE ACR