SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Crime No. 119/2018 Of Sholayur … vs By Adv. Sri.V.A.Johnson … on 12 November, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

MONDAY ,THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 21ST KARTHIKA, 1940

Bail Appl..No. 7374 of 2018

CRIME NO. 119/2018 OF SHOLAYUR POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD

APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.1:

SWAMINATHAN,
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O.KANDAMUTHAN, THENARI KAMBAKUDAM HOUSE,
ELAPPULLY, PALAKKAD.

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

SRI AMJAD ALI SR PP

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.11.2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 7374 of 2018 2

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

2. The applicant herein is the 1st accused in Crime No.119 of

2018 registered at the Sholayur Police under Sections 143, 144, 145,

147, 323, 406, 420, 447, 506(ii), 294(b) and 498A r/w Section 149 of

the IPC.

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

Their marriage was solemnized on 14.12.2015. The prosecution

allegation is that during the period of marriage, the applicant

subjected the lady to physical as well as mental harassment

demanding dowry. It is specifically alleged that on one instance, the

applicant entered into the paternal house of the victim and assaulted

her causing injuries.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant contended

that the allegations are without basis. According to the learned
Bail Appl..No. 7374 of 2018 3

counsel, the de facto complainant had married another man and

during the subsistence of the said marriage, she had married the

applicant. When this fact came to his notice, he filed a petition before

the Family Court seeking damages and other reliefs. Reference is

made to Annexrue-A Original Petition pending before the Family Court,

Palakkad. It is further submitted that the allegation of physical abuse

is false. After the filing of the said petition, false accusations are now

being raised against him is the submission.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted

that though serious allegations are levelled, no materials have been

produced along with the complaint to show that any physical injuries

were inflicted. In the facts and circumstances, it would be sufficient if

the applicant is ordered to co-operate with the investigation, submitted

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
Bail Appl..No. 7374 of 2018 4

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 one
month or till final report is filed whichever is earlier.

(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
IAP

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh