Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V. THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1942 CRIME NO.938/2020 OF Edakkara Police Station , Malappuram PETITIONERS/ACCUSED :- 1 XXX 2 XXX BY ADV. SRI.T.U.SUJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDAKKARA POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031 G.P AJITH MURALI THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Dated this the 25th day of February 2021 Application for pre-arrest bail.
2. Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 accused in Crime No.938 of 2020 of Edakkara Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
3. The prosecution allegation is as follows :-
The first petitioner is the step mother of the two minor children aged 11 years and 10 years respectively. The second petitioner is the father of the minor children. On 06.12.2020 at about 16.00 hours while the minor children were playing quarreled each other. On seeing this the first accused brought a cane and beaten both of them. She had also caused burn injuries with a heated spatula to both the children on their palms in the presence of the second accused. But he stood simply watching the same and
had even made a comment that they deserve more stringent punishments and thus encouraged the first petitioner to commit the offences alleged against her. Thus these petitioners have committed the aforesaid offences.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit in fact both the children have no complaints against these petitioners and they have given a false statement at the instigation of their uncle, the brother of the mother of the minor children. But these petitioners apprehend arrest and torture by the police and hence this application.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the application and submitted the report along with the wound certificates of the minor children.
7. Both the wound certificates of the minor children aged just 10 years and 11 years would show that they have sustained burn injuries on their hands, palms, neck etc. The cause of the injuries has also been stated by them before the doctor, who examined them and that has been specifically recorded and endorsed in the wound certificate.
8. The first petitioner is the second wife of the second petitioner, the father of the minor children. The records would further reveal that the first petitioner had treated the minor children with cruelty and it was even in the presence of the second
petitioner. Prima facie it appears that he did not object the ill treatment from the side of this first petitioner towards his minor children. On the other hand, he has just encouraged her to do such cruel things to his own minor children.
9. Therefore, it is prima facie revealed from the records produced before me that both the children were subjected to cruelty by the step mother. Right
now the children are residing along with their maternal parents. No doubt, the allegations levelled against these petitioners are grave heinous and serious in nature.
10. It is also revealed from the records that the first petitioner though having a minor child aged 2 years, did not give any attention to the children of the second petitioner and after the birth of her child they were subjected to severe cruelty as revealed from the statement given by them before the investigating officer.
11. It is well settled that the discretion under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on the circumstances justifying its exercise.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances involved in this case, I do not find any justification to think that this is a fit case in which the anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners though she is having a minor child aged 2 years. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed. Sd/- SHIRCY V. JUDGE SMA