IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 21ST KARTHIKA, 1941
Bail Appl..No.8046 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 1915/2019 DATED 31-10-2019 OF SESSIONS
COURT,THRISSUR
CRIME NO.1004/2019 OF Thrissur Town East Police Station , Thrissur
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:
SAJEEV P.P.
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O. PAPPUKUTTY, PASHNATH HOUSE, MALA, NOW RESIDING
AT IE TEMPLE TREES APARTMENT, PAZHAYANADAKKAVU,
THRISSUR.
BY ADV. SMT.K.V.BHADRA KUMARI
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.11.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.8046/2019 2
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
——————————————-
B.A.No.8046 of 2019
———————————————-
Dated this the 12th day of November, 2019
ORDER
The petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused No.1 among the
three accused in the instant Crime No.1004/2019 of Thrissur Town East
Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under
Sections 420, 323, 294(b), 506(i), 498A r/w. Sec.34 of the SectionIPC on the basis
of the First Information Statement given by the lady defacto complainant
in this case on 6.9.2019 in respect of the alleged incident which happened
for the period from 1.7.2019 to 6.9.2019. The defacto complainant in this
case is the wife of the petitioner herein (A1). A2 and A3 are the mother and
sister’s husband respectively of the petitioner herein (A1).
2. The prosecution case in short is that the petitioner, who is the
husband of the defacto complainant had subjected her to matrimonial
cruelty and voluntarily caused hurt to her and that A2 and A3 had
assaulted her and misappropriated her patrimony. Further that the
marriage between the above said spouses was conducted recently on
1.7.2019 and they have stayed together only for few days and that the
petitioner has misappropriated cash worth about Rs.22 lakhs and gold
ornaments worth about 4.5 lakhs given by her family etc. It appears that
the petitioner is aged 59 years and this is the 2 nd marriage of the defacto
B.A.No.8046/2019 3
complainant. A2 is the mother of the petitioner, aged more than 88 years.
The petitioner has been arrested in this case on 11.10.2019 and after his
remand, has been under detention for the last 32 days.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the
above said allegations are false and baseless and further that the lady
defacto complainant has stayed with the petitioner for hardly few days and
the above said allegations have been falsely made only to wreck vengeance
on the petitioner and his family members. Further that it was highly
improper to have made the petitioner suffer remand for the last 32 days for
the above said allegations. Accordingly, it is urged by the learned counsel
for the petitioner that the petitioner may be ordered to be released on bail
subject to stringent conditions that may be appropriately imposed by this
court.
4. After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of the
facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the
petitioner is aged more than 59 years and also the crucial fact that he has
already suffered detention for the last more than 32 days, this Court is
constrained to take the view that further incarceration of the petitioner is
not necessary and proper and the petitioner could be released on regular
bail subject to appropriate conditions. Accordingly, it is ordered that the
petitioner/1st accused shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for
Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) and on his furnishing 2 solvent
sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the competent court
concerned. However, the above order shall be subject to the following
B.A.No.8046/2019 4
conditions:
(i). The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating
Officer in the interrogation process as and when
directed by him.
(ii). The petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to
influence the defacto complainant/victim, witnesses;
nor shall tamper with the evidence.
(iii). The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence
while on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional
Court concerned will stand hereby empowered to consider the application
for cancellation of bail, if required, and pass appropriate orders in
accordance with the law.
With these observations and directions, the above Application will
stand disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
acd
//true copy // PS to Judge