SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dinesh Babu @ Dinesan vs State Of Kerala on 3 September, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 12TH BHADRA, 1941

Bail Appl..No.6349 OF 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 3964/2019 DATED 26-08-2019 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KODUNGALLUR

CRIME NO.856/2018 OF Kodungallur Police Station , Thrissur

PETITIONER:

DINESH BABU @ DINESAN
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, MARINGATHARA HOUSE, PULLUT,
CHAPPARA.P.O, PULLUT VILLAGE, KODUNGALLURE TALUK-
680663

BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT

RESPONDENT:

STATE OF KERALA
REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.6349 OF 2019

2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 6349/2019

DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019

O R D E R

Petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused no.1 among the 3 accused

in crime No. 856/2018 of Kodungalloor Police Station in which the offences

alleged are those punishable under Sections 498A and Section306 of the IPC.

Accused nos. 2 and 3 in the above said crime are the mother and sister

respectively of the 1st petitioner. The above said crime arises out of the suicide

committed by the wife of the petitioner herein.

2. The brief of the prosecution case is that on 18.9.2018 at after 10

a.m., the deceased lady had committed suicide by pouring kerosene over

herself and then setting her ablaze and the deceased lady had died on the

same day. Further case of the prosecution case is that the petitioners herein

(husband, mother-in-law sister-in-law) of the deceased lady had constantly

harassed and inflicted cruelty on her and has frequently demanded more

dowry amount and that by their consistent behaviour of inflicting cruelty and

harassment on her, she was driven to commit suicide and that therefore, the

petitioners have thereby committed the offences punishable under Sections

498A and Section306 of IPC.

3. Consequent to the directions issued by this Court in Annexure A2
Bail Appl..No.6349 OF 2019

3

order dated 17/07/2019, the petitioner has undergone interrogation process

before the IO and thereafter the learned Magistrate ordered to remand him

and he has been in custody since 22/08/2019. Counsel for the petitioner

would point out that the interrogation has been completed effectively and

petitioner has fully co-operated with the interrogation process and that

thereafter, the IO has not sought the permission to again subject the

petitioner for custodial interrogation as the interrogation process is

completely over. Further it is pointed out by the petitioner’s counsel that

since the petitioner has fully co-operated with the interrogation process, no

effective purpose will be served by his continued detention and that this Court

may order to release him on regular bail. In that regard, counsel for the

petitioner would point out that none of the vital ingredients of offence of

abatement as per Sectionsection 107 of the IPC and offence of abatement of

committing suicide as per Sectionsection 306 of the IPC are made out in this case and

petitioner’s counsel has placed reliance on various decisions of the Apex Court

and that of this Court in cases as in SectionSanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar v.

State of M.P. [2002 SCC (Crl) 1141], Dr. Krishnadas. SectionP. v. State of

Kerala and another [2017 (2) KLT 579] and SectionGurcharan Singh v. State

of Punjab [2016 (12) SCALE 414], SectionHarikrishnan another v. State of

Kerala another [ 2019 (3) KHC 437] etc, and would contend that the

ingredients of the vital element of instigation to commit suicide of the

deceased are not available in this case.

Bail Appl..No.6349 OF 2019

4

4. Learned Prosecutor has seriously opposed the plea for regular bail

and has pointed out that most of the witnesses who have given evidence

against the accused persons in this crime are members of the locality and

there is a strong likelihood of the petitioner influencing and intimidating the

witnesses, if he is let out on bail.

5. After anxiously considering the rival pleas and after carefully

evaluating the facts and circumstances of this case and taking into account

that the nature of the allegations involved are those under section 498 A and

306 of the SectionIPC and also the fact that interrogation process of the petitioner

have nearly been completed and that the Police has not thereafter sought his

custodial interrogation etc, this Court is inclined to take the view that his

further detention may not be necessary. However, the apprehension raised by

the prosecution regarding the strong likelihood of the petitioner intimidating

and influencing the witnesses or members of the locality cannot be brushed

aside by this Court and necessary safe guards will have to be granted by this

Court as conditions in the grant of bail.

6. Accordingly it is proposed to order that petitioner shall not enter

into or reside anywhere within the territorial limits of Kodungalloor police

station where the above crime is being investigated until the conclusion of the

investigating process, subject to certain conditions which will be dealt with

hereinafter.

7. Accordingly it is ordered that petitioner shall be released on bail
Bail Appl..No.6349 OF 2019

5

on his executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Fourty Thousand only) and

on his furnishing 2 solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of

the Investigating Officer concerned.

8. However, the grant of bail will be subject to the following
conditions:

(1)Petitioner will report before the IO at any time between 9 am and
1 pm on all 2nd and 4th Saturdays for the next six months and then
will report before the Investigating Officer, as and when directed by
the Officer.

(2)The petitioner will not involve in any criminal offences of similar
nature.

(3)The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(4)The petitioner shall not influence witness or shall not tamper or
attempt to tamper evidence in any manner, whatsoever.
(5)The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and
when required in that connection.

(6)Petitioner shall not visit or go anywhere within the territorial
limits of Kodungalloor police station where the crime is being
investigated until the conclusion of investigating process except
for the limited purpose of reporting before the Investigating
Officer in connection with the above said crime or any other
crimes or for attending any courts in relation to this case or for
contacting his Advocate. However, in case the petitioner has got
any emergent personal need to visit the said area, then he may
do so, but only with prior permission of the investigating Officer
concerned. In that regard, it is brought to the notice of this Court
by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner’s mother
Bail Appl..No.6349 OF 2019

6

has recently suffered a serious stroke and that his presence may
be required to help her with her treatment. If that be so, it is for
the petitioner to make out his special grievances in that regard
before the IO concerned who will consider the same and the IO
will then be at liberty to make appropriate relaxation for the
above said conditions as and when found to be necessary and just
and for which purpose the IO need not seek any permission of
this Court. However, the IO in that regard should ensure that
petitioner does not in any manner abuse the above said liberty
and he uses the said permission only for the genuine purpose of
treatment of his mother.

(9)If there is any violation of the abovesaid conditions by the
petitioner then the jurisdictional court concerned stand hereby
empowered, to consider the plea for cancellation of bail at the
appropriate time.

With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application will

stand disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS

Nsd JUDGE
//true copy//
PA to Judge

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