IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 29TH BHADRA, 1941

BAIL APPL.NO.5476 OF 2019

CRIME NO.431/2019 OF FEROKE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

PRADEESH KUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O.CHINNAN, PARAYIL HOUSE,
THADAYAPARAMBA, VAIDHYARANGADI,
RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

RESPONDENTS/STATE COMPLAINANT:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI,PIN-682031.

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
FEROKE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT,
PIN-673631.

SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
———————————–
B.A. No. 5476 of 2019
———————————–
Dated this the 20th day of September, 2019

ORDER

The petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused No.1

among the 6 accused in the instant Crime No.431/2019 of Feroke

Police Station,which has been registered for offences punishable

under Secs.498A, 306 34 of the SectionIPC on 1.6.2019. The said crime

was initially registered as Crime No.106/2019 of Vazhakkad Police

Station, under Sec.174 of the SectionCr.P.C. on account of the unnatural

death of victim lady who is the wife of the petitioner (A-1).

The Police after investigation has added the offences as per

Secs.498A 306 of the SectionIPC, and the petitioner and 5 others have

been arrayed as the 6 accused persons in the crime. Later the said

crime was transferred to Feroke Police Station, wherein it was

registered as Crime No.431/2019, as stated above.

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

of the abovesaid spouses, the accused persons have treated the

victim lady with cruelty and harassment, and that they demanded

more dowry, and that they misappropriated her gold ornaments, etc

and it is on account of their cruelty and harassment, the lady
B.A. No. 5476 of 2019

..3..

committed suicide on 27.4.2019. Accused Nos. 2 to 6 are the mother,

sister, sister’s husband and the two daughters of A3 A4

respectively. Accused Nos. 2 to 6 have already been granted

anticipatory bail in this crime as per Anx.A order dated 16.7.2019 in

B.A. No.4811/2019.

3. The main material on the basis of which prosecution

places reliance in support of the allegations for inclusion of offence as

per Sec.306 of the SectionIPC (abetment to commit suicide) is a diary said to

have written by the deceased lady. The case of prosecution is that,

lady had used one of the diary book which was earlier used by her

son to make her diary entries, and after her death, the minor son had

handed over the said diary to her parents, who in turn had produced

it before the Investigating Officer concerned. The learned Prosecutor

has made available a photocopy of the said diary for the perusal of

this Court.

4. Sri.Babu S.Nair, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner would point out the various rulings of the Apex Court and

various High Courts including this Court regarding the legal

parameters laid down therein in respect to the vital ingredients

to be satisfied for attracting the offence of abetment as per Sec.107 of
B.A. No. 5476 of 2019

..4..

the SectionIPC and the offence of abetment to commit suicide as per Sec.306

of the SectionIPC, by citing decisions as in SectionSanju Alias Sanjay Singh

Sengar v. State of M.P. [2002 SCC (Cri) 1141

(2002) 5 SCC 371], Krishnadas P. (Dr.) (Adv.) v. State of

Kerala and Another [2017 (2) KLT 579], SectionGurcharan

Singh v. State of Punjab [2016 (12) SCALE 414] and

SectionHarikrishnan and Another v. State of Kerala and

Another [2019 (3) KHC 437]. On the basis of said rulings,

counsel for the petitioner would urge that no materials have been

collected by the investigating agency, to even remotely connect the

petitioner and other accused that they have in any manner

instigated the suicide of the deceased lady.

5. Accused Nos. 2 to 6 have already been granted

anticipatory bail in this crime as per Anx.A order dated 16.7.2019 in

B.A. No.4811/2019. After hearing both sides and after careful

evaluation of the facts and circumstances of the case, more

particularly testing the facts of the case in the light of the abovesaid

judicial precedents, this Court is inclined to take the view that the

petitioner has made out a strong probable case that his custodial
B.A. No. 5476 of 2019

..5..

interrogation is not necessary for effectuating smooth and fair

conduct of investigation in this case. However, the petitioner will

have to fully co-operate in the investigation process. Accordingly the

following directions and orders are passed.

i. The petitioner will immediately personally appear before the
Investigating Officer(I.O.) in relation to this crime for interrogation
purposes at any rate by 9 am on any day on or before 3.10.2019, or
within such time limit that may be extended by the I.O. as he deems fit
and proper.

ii. The petitioner will fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer in
the conduct of the above interrogation process.
iii. If the investigation process is not over on a single day, it will
be open to the Investigating Officer to insist that the
petitioner should appear on the next available working day
or any other suitable day that may be fixed by him, which the
petitioner will comply.

iv. After the interrogation process is over, in case the
Investigating Officer arrests the petitioner in relation to the
abovesaid crime, then he shall be released on bail on executing
bond for Rs.40,000/- and on furnishing two solvent sureties
for the like sum, each 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 petitioner shall not involve in any criminal offences of
similar nature.

B.A. No. 5476 of 2019

..6..

ii. The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation.
iii. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as
and when required in that connection.

iv. The petitioner 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

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,
JUDGE

MMG