SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jaison vs State Of Kerala on 13 February, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 24TH MAGHA, 1940

Bail Appl..No. 995 of 2019

CRIME NO. 46/2018 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

JAISON, AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O. JOLLY,PULIKKATHARA HOUSE, GOTHURUTH KARA,
GOTHURUTH POST, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 516

BY ADVS.
SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR
SRI.M.S.SANDEEP SUDHAKARAN

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

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

2 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 504.

SMT. K. SHEEBA PP.

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 995 of 2019 2

ORDER

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

2. The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.46 of 2018

registered at the Vadakkekara Police Station under Section 498A r/w.

Sec. 34 of the IPC. The de facto complainant is his wife.

3. According to the de facto complainant, the marriage

between the applicant and the de facto complainant was solemnized

more than a decade back and they have three children. According to

her, from the date of marriage, the applicant used to subject her to

physical and mental harassment demanding dowry. She would also

state that on numerous occasions, the applicant used to physically

assault her and she had to undergo treatment.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted

that the allegations levelled against the applicant are without basis.

According to the learned counsel, parties are still residing with the

aged parents of the applicant. The de facto complainant insisted that

they resides separately. When he refused to oblige, false accusations

are now being raised against him. He points out that though the
Bail Appl..No. 995 of 2019 3

provision was enacted to check and curb the menace of dowry, in the

instant case, the provisions are being misused. The complaint has

been filed in the heat of the moment and, according to the learned

counsel, if the applicant is arrested and remanded, the chances of

settlement and reunion will be irrevocably ruined.

5. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor and I have perused the

materials made available. The allegations now levelled do not appear

to be grave warranting arrest and detention of the applicant, who is

the husband of the de facto complainant. I am of the considered view

that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary for an

effective investigation in the instant case.

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:

Bail Appl..No. 995 of 2019 4

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and
the 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 act of physical abuse on his wife.

iv) 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 © 2019 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