SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Crime No.1587/2019 Of Kollam East … vs By Adv. Sri.Alan Papali on 30 September, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BABU

MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 8TH ASWINA, 1941

Bail Appl..No.6873 OF 2019

CRIME NO.1587/2019 OF Kollam East Police Station , Kollam

PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED

MANOJ MADHUSOODHANAN
AGED 31 YEARS
SON OF MADHUSOODHANAN, SHEELA MANDIRAM,
KADAKKAL, KOTTAPURAM, ELAMZHANNOOR P.O, KOLLAM
DISTRICT

BY ADV. SRI.ALAN PAPALI

RESPONDENTS/STATE COMPLAINANT

1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691
001

OTHER PRESENT:

SRI. C.K. PRASAD .PP

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.6873/2019
2

ORDER

1. The petitioner seeks bail under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C. He is the first

accused in crime No.1587/2018 of Kollam east police station.

He is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Secs

294(b), 323, 406, 494, 498A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code

read with Sec.34 of the said Code.

2. The prosecution case is this : The accused persons, who

number three, in furtherance of their common intention,

assaulted the first informant, abused her with obscene words

and harassed her and also treated her with cruelty. It is also

alleged that the petitioner married another girl and committed

the offence of bigamy.

3. Heard Sri.Alan Papali, the learned counsel for the petitioner and

Sri.C.K.Prasad, the learned public prosecutor.

4. Of different offences alleged against the petitioner, those which
B.A.6873/2019
3

are non-bailable are those punishable under Secs 406 and 498A

of IPC. It appears that Sec.406 of IPC is incorporated alleging

that the cash and kind given at the time of marriage as dowry

were misappropriated by the accused persons. The allegation to

attract Sec.498A of IPC made in the FI statement is the physical

ill-treatment meted out to the first informant on 1.5.2017. As

argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the very filing

of the complaint has been delayed by 1½ years. The case diary

does not suggest the sustainment of any injury by the first

informant. Accused 2 and 3 have been granted anticipatory bail

by this court. Detention of the petitioner does not appear to be

necessary for an effective investigation of the case. For these

reasons, I am inclined to grant bail under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is employed abroad and that unless he reports for

duty on the expiry of the period of leave, he is sure to lose his

job. I am therefore not directing the petitioner to surrender his

passport. But before he leaves for the country where he is
B.A.6873/2019
4

working, he shall take the permission of the magistrate to go

abroad.

6. The application is allowed. If arrested in connection with crime

No.1587/2018 of Kollam east police station, the petitioner shall

be released on bail after interrogation, if any, on his executing a

bond for Rs 75,000/- (seventy five thousand only) with two

solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

investigating officer. The petitioner shall co-operate with the

investigation. He shall make himself available for interrogation

if so required by the investigating officer so long as he is in

India. He shall report to the investigating officer between 10.00

am and 11.00 am on all alternative days for a period of two

weeks or till the filing of the final report, whichever is earlier.

The petitioner shall not intimidate or try to influence witnesses.

Nor shall he destroy or tamper with evidence. He shall not leave

the country without the permission of the learned magistrate

having jurisdiction to try the case. The learned magistrate is

hereby empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with law if
B.A.6873/2019
5

any of the above condition is violated. If the petitioner chooses

to surrender before the magistrate, this order will cease to have

effect and the learned magistrate will pass appropriate orders

as if this order has not been passed.

Sd/-

A.M.BABU
Judge

Mrcs/30.9.

/True copy/

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 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