SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Biju vs State Of Kerala on 25 October, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940

Bail Appl..No. 5845 of 2018

CRIME NO. 649/2018 OF PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

BIJU, AGED 34 YEARS,
S/O MADHUSOODANAN PILLAI, BIJU BHAVAN,
POZHIKKARA CHERRY PARAVUR VILLAGE, KOLLAM

BY ADV. SASITH PANICKER

RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682031.

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR, PARAVUR POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM – 691001.

BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.N. PRABHAKARAN

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

2. The applicant herein is the 1 st accused in Crime No.649 of

2018 registered at the Paravur Police Station under Sections 498A,

294(b), 323, 509 , 511 of S. 324 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

3. The de facto complainant is the wife of the applicant

herein. According to the de facto complainant, the marriage between
BA:5845/18 2

herself and the applicant was solemnized on 7.6.2017 and they are

blessed with a child. It is alleged that at the time of marriage, about

40 sovereigns of gold ornaments and a sum of Rs.1 Lakh was

handed over to the applicant. However, the applicant and his family

members started physically as well as mentally harassing the de

facto complainant demanding more dowry. While the de facto

complainant was four months pregnant, the applicant herein is

alleged to have inflicted a burn injury with an iron box. On

15.7.2018, he is alleged to have inflicted injuries with a key chain.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted

that he is innocent of all allegation. The marriage still subsists and

all efforts are being made to rekindle the relationship with the

interest of the child in mind. According to the learned counsel, the

dispute essentially revolves around the unwillingness of the de facto

complainant to permit the parents of the applicant to stay with the

spouses. The allegation of physical abuse is not true, submits the

learned counsel. It is further contended that the complaint has been

filed in the heat of the moment and it is prayed that he be spared

from the rigours of custodial interrogation.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor has strenuously opposed
BA:5845/18 3

the prayer. Referring to the wound certificate of the Government

Medical College Hospital, Kollam, it is contended that the de facto

complainant had sustained abrasions consequent to the infliction of

injuries with the key chain. In the facts and circumstances, it would

be sufficient if the applicant herein is ordered to co-operate with the

investigation, submits the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced. After going

through the materials on record, I am of the considered view that

the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary for an

effective investigation in the instant case.

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

applicant shall appear before the investigating officer within ten days

from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is

proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand

only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above

order shall be subject to the following conditions:

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation
and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every
Saturdays between 10 A.M and 1 P.M. for a period of two
months or till final report is filed whichever is earlier.

BA:5845/18 4

ii) He shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted
with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from
disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

iii) He shall not commit any similar 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
krj

//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