SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Arun.C.A. vs State Of Kerala on 10 December, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

Bail Appl..No. 8185 of 2018

CRIME NO. 1589/2018 OF KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 ARUN.C.A., AGED 30 YEARS,
S/O.ABDUL RAHMAN, ARAFA VILLA, KANIYAMKUNNU,
NEAR U.C.COLLEGE, ALUVA.P.O,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683102.

2 LAILA, AGED 66 YEARS,
W/O.ABDUL RAHMAN, ARAFA VILLA,
KANIYAMKUNNU, NEAR U.C.COLLEGE, ALUVA.P.O,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683102.

3 ABDUL RAHMAN, AGED 66 YEARS,
S/O.KOCHUNNI, ARAFA VILLA,
KANIYAMKUNNU, NEAR U.C.COLLEGE,
ALUVA.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683102.

BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KALAMASSERY CBCID, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

SRI T R RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.12.2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 8185 of 2018 2

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.

2. The 1st applicant herein is the son of applicant Nos.2 and

3. They are the accused in Crime No.1589 of 2018 registered at the

Kalamassery Police Station under Sections 498A and 304B r/w

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The wife of the 1st applicant, committed suicide on

14.9.2018 by hanging herself while she was residing in her parental

home. According to the prosecution, the 1 st applicant after marrying

the deceased in the year 2014, subjected the lady to physical and

mental harassment demanding dowry. The applicant Nos. 2 and 3

are alleged to have actively aided the 1 st accused to commit the

aforesaid act.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicants

submitted that applicants herein are quite innocent. According to

the learned counsel, the wife of the 1st applicant was hypersensitive

to ordinary petulance and used to be disturbed for minor discords
Bail Appl..No. 8185 of 2018 3

which happen in every matrimonial home. According to the learned

counsel, numerous letters were issued by the deceased to the 1 st

applicant just prior to the birth of the second child and she had not

alleged that the applicants had subjected her to any act of cruelty. It

is further urged that the applicants were arrested on 20.11.2018 and

they were given in police custody. He prays that the applicants be

released on bail.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. It

is submitted that the death had occurred within 7 years of marriage

and hence, the presumption under Sections 113A and 113B would

squarely apply.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced. Having gone

through the statement of the parents of the deceased and the letter

purportedly sent by the deceased to the 1 st applicant, I am of the

view that further detention in custody of the applicants are not

required. Furthermore, much progress has been achieved insofar as

the investigation is concerned. The applicants were also given in

police custody.

Bail Appl..No. 8185 of 2018 4

7. In the result, this application will stand allowed. The

applicants shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two solvent

sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having

jurisdiction. The above order shall be subject to the following

conditions:

1). The 1st applicant shall appear before the
Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9
a.m. and 11 a.m., for a period of two months or till
final report is filed, whichever is earlier. The
applicant Nos. 2 and 3 shall appear as and when
directed to do so.

2). They shall not intimidate or attempt to influence
the witnesses; nor shall they tamper with the
evidence.

3). They shall not commit any offence while on bail.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the
jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application
for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance
with the law.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
DSV/-

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation