Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 26TH SRAVANA, 1943 CRIME NO.177/2021 OF Aranmula Police Station, Pathanamthitta PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:
1 BADUSHA BASHEER AGED 27 YEARS S/O. BASHEER M, PUTHUPARAMPIL VEEDU, KANGAZHA VILLAGE, EDAYIRIKAPUZHA P.O, KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 541 2 BASHEER M S/O. KOCHUMUHAMMED, PUTHUPARAMPIL VEEDU, KANGAZHA VILLAGE, EDAYIRIKAPUZHA P.O, KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 541 BY ADVS. MANU RAMACHANDRAN M.KIRANLAL R.RAJESH (VARKALA) T.S.SARATH SAMEER M NAIR
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682 031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ARANMULA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689 533 *3 ADDL R3 ASHNA HARIS AGED 20 YEARS D/O HARIS KM,ASHNA MANZIL,NARANGANAM NORTH PO, CHERUKOLE VILLAGE , PATHANAMTHITTA -689641 *IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL R3 AS PER ORDER DATED 23/7/2021 IN CRL MA 2/2021 BY ADV SRI. SAGEETH RAJ PP SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN R3 THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code.
2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498 A, 323, 354 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution case is that the accused No.1 married
the defacto complainant as per Islamic religious rites on 07.07.2019. At the time of marriage, the parents of the defacto complainant provided her 27 sovereigns of gold, out of which 25 sovereigns were appropriated by the 1st accused without her consent. Even after that, the defacto complainant was subjected to cruelty, demanding more amount as dowry. Apart from the above, it is also alleged that on 29.07.2019 the 2 nd accused who is the father of the 1st accused and father-in-law of the defacto complainant caught hold the hand of the defacto complainant with sexual intent and thereby outraged the modesty of the defacto complainant. The aforesaid crime was registered in the above
circumstances. The defacto complainant is impleaded as additional 3rd respondent.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and also the learned counsel for the defacto complainant.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent of all the allegations and the complaint was submitted by the defacto complainant only to strengthen her bargaining however in the matrimonial disputes pending between the parties. He points out that even though the incidents on the basis of which the complainant filed were occurred in the year 2019 and the crime was registered on the basis of a private complaint submitted in the year 2021.
6. The aforesaid contention was objected by the learned
counsel for the 3rd respondent pointing out that she had specifically averred in her complaint that, even though on earlier occasions, she approached the police no steps were taken in this regard.
7. On perusal of records it is evident that, basically it is a matrimonial dispute. The litigations are pending between parties
in the form of original petition before Family Court, Pathanamthitta for return of gold and for the reliefs incidental to the same. It is also evident that the incident which formed the basis of the complaint were occurred in the year 2019 and there is delay in registering the FIR. In such circumstances, this Court finds some force in the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners. However, it is a matter to be investigated by the police for which the co-operation of the petitioners with the Investigation Officer is to be ensured. This Court is of the view that, the purpose of ensuring a proper investigation can be served by the ensuring the appearance of the petitioners before the Investigation Officer. In such circumstances, this bail application is disposed of with the following directions:-
(i) The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigation officer, within a period of two weeks from the date of the order, for subjecting himself for interrogation;
(ii) Upon such surrender and after interrogation, if any, the petitioners shall be produced by the investigation officer before the Judicial First Class Magistrate having jurisdiction on the very same day of surrender itself, to enable the petitioners to seek bail;
(iii) The Judicial First Class Magistrate, upon production of
the accused and filing of application for bail, may consider the bail application in accordance with law, and if possible, dispose of the same in accordance to law, on the very same day of filing of the said application, subject to such conditions, as deem fit. The Bail Application is disposed of with the above directions. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE VPK