SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

P.V.Prasanna vs State Of Kerala on 17 October, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 25TH ASWINA, 1941

BAIL APPL.NO.6858 OF 2019

CRIME NO.977/2019 OF THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2, 3 4:

1 P.V.PRASANNA, AGED 53 YEARS
W/O.N.V.BALAKRISHNAN, HOME MAKER, RESHMA NIVAS,
KEEZHATTOOR, P.O.TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR-670141.

2 N.V.BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 65 YEARS,
S/O.ACHUTHAN, NO OCCUPATION, RESHMA NIVAS,
KEEZHATTOOR, P.O.TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR-670141.

3 RESHMA P.V., AGED 29 YEARS,
D/O.N.V.BALAKRISHNAN, TEACHER, RESHMA NIVAS,
KEEZHATTOOR, P.O.TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR-670141.

BY ADVS.
SRI.MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN,
SRI.BIJU K.JOSEPH

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
——————————————–
B.A. No. 6858 of 2019
——————————————–
Dated this the 17th day of October, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein have been arrayed as accused

Nos.2, 3 4 among the 4 accused in the instant Crime

No.977/2019 of Thaliparamba Police Station, which has been

registered for offences punishable under Secs.498A, 406, 323, 354

34 of the SectionIPC, on the basis of FIS given by lady defacto

complainant on 7.9.2019 at about 5.25 pm in respect of the alleged

incidents which have happened from 7.12.2014 onwards. Accused

No.1, who is the husband of the lady defacto complainant in this

case is now abroad. The petitioners (A2 to A4) are the mother,

father and sister respectively of A1.

2. The prosecution case in short is that, after the

marriage of abovesaid spouses on 7.12.2014, the petitioners have

treated the lady defacto complainant with cruelty and harassment,

and that they used to frequently harass the lady by demanding

that she lacks beauty, and on 17.8.2019 , A1 to A4 had trespassed

into her parental home and demanded that she should agree for

divorce, and since she refused it, A1 had slapped on her face and
B.A. No. 6858 of 2019
..3..

had assaulted her mother, and A3 had caught hold of her by her hair.

3. The counsel for the petitioners would point out that

the abovesaid allegations are false and baseless, and that the 2 nd

petitioner herein (A3) is a senior citizen aged more 65 years, and he is

suffering from serious cardiac ailments as evident from Anxs.A4 to

A7 medical records, and that the 1 st petitioner (A2) is also suffering

from serious ailments as can be seen from Anxs.A2 A3 medical

records, and further that the abovesaid allegations have been made

by the complainant against the 2nd petitioner (A3) only to entrap in a

false case on account of the matrimonial disputes between the

spouses. Accordingly the counsel for the petitioners would point out

that this Court may grant anticipatory bail subject to stringent

conditions.

4. The learned Prosecutor has opposed the plea for

anticipatory bail.

5. After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of

the facts of the case, more particularly taking into account the

relationship between the parties and the age of the petitioners herein,

this Court is inclined to take the view that the custodial interrogation

of the petitioners may not be necessary for effectuating smooth and

fair conduct of investigation in this crime. Accordingly it is ordered

that in the event of the petitioners being arrested by police in
B.A. No. 6858 of 2019
..4..

connection with the abovesaid crime, they shall be released on bail on

their separately executing bonds for Rs.40,000/- each and on their

separately furnishing two solvent sureties each for the like sum, both

to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer concerned.

6. Further it is also ordered that the grant of bail will be

subject to following conditions:-

i. The petitioners shall not involve in any criminal
offences of similar nature.

ii. The petitioners shall fully co-operate with the
investigation.

iii. The petitioners shall report before the investigating
officer as and when required in that connection.
iv. The petitioners shall not influence witness or shall not
tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner,
whatsoever.

If there is any violation of the abovesaid conditions by

the petitioners 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,
JUDGE

MMG

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