IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017/22ND BHADRA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 6160 of 2017 ()
——————————-
CRIME NO.224/2017 OF BEKAL POLICE STATION , KASARGOD
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
—————————–
SUJATHMON K.P @ SUJATH,
S/O.MADHAVAN NAIR, AGED 35 YEARS,
PLATTI, PERALADUKAM, KOLATHUR VILLAGE,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT/STATE:
——————————————–
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SAJJU.S.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13-09-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
P.UBAID, J.
~~~~~~~~~~
B.A No.6160 of 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 13th September, 2017
O R D E R
The petitioner herein is the 1st accused in Crime
No.224 of 2017 of the Bekal Police Station registered under
Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. He seeks
regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. The application filed by him for regular bail was
dismissed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II,
Hosdurg on 18.8.2017 The petitioner has been in judicial
custody since 18.8.2017.
2. This crime relates to the commission of suicide
by the petitioner’s wife Preena. She was married by the
petitioner on 21.4.2015 and she committed suicide on
10.4.2017. The prosecution would allege that she had been
mentally and physically ill-treated by her husband and the
parents-in-law, and Preena committed suicide when she felt
the acts of cruelty unbearable.
3. On a perusal of the entire materials including the
statements given by the parents of the deceased, I find
nothing definite against the petitioner. The F.I Statement
B.A No.6160 of 2017
2
given by the paternal uncle of the deceased does not
contain any allegation against the petitioner or his parents.
It appears that the prosecution is mainly on the statements
given by the parents of the deceased. Their statements are
also practically against the parents-in-law of the deceased,
and not against the husband of the deceased. The parents
of the deceased are consistent that she was not allowed by
her parents-in-law to live at the matrimonial home
peacefully and happily. If at all that statement is true and
acceptable, the prosecution case must be against the
parents-in-law, and not against the husband.
4. This application for regular bail is opposed by the
learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that investigation is
still in progress, and that if the accused is now released, he
will definitely obstruct the investigation.
5. On hearing both sides, I find that investigation in
this case is practically over, and that the petitioner can be
now released on appropriate conditions. I find that the
Investigating Officer has already questioned the material
witnesses, and has collected the necessary materials for a
prosecution. I do not find the necessity of continued
detention of the petitioner in custody. However, some
B.A No.6160 of 2017
3
reasonable conditions for bail are felt necessary in the
particular facts and circumstances.
In the result, this application for bail is allowed. The
petitioner will be released on bail on his executing a bond
with two solvent sureties for 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty
thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the court below
having jurisdiction. Bail is granted on condition that;
a. The petitioner shall report before the
Investigating Officer between 10.00 am and 11 am on all
Tuesdays for a period of two months.
b. The petitioner shall not leave the limits of the
Bekal Police Station for two months.
c. The petitioner shall not in any manner influence
or intimidate the witnesses and he shall not have any
contact with the material witnesses directly or over
telephone or otherwise.
Sd/-
P.UBAID
JUDGE
ma
/True copy/
P.S to Judge
