IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 803 of 2019
CRIME NO. 2299/2018 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:
SHANAVAS THAHA, AGED 35 YEARS,
S/O.THAHAKOYA, THADAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,
FREEDIA NAGAR-86, T.K.M.C.P.O., KARIKODU,
KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KUNDARA P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-691501.
SRI. T. R. RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.02.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 803 of 2019 2
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
2. The applicant herein is the 1 st accused in Crime No.2299 of
2018 of the Kundara Police Station registered under Sections 342,
323, 324 and 498A r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The crime was registered on the strength of a private
complaint filed by the wife of the applicant herein. She would allege
that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 01.12.2013.
Large amount of cash as well as gold were handed over. Portion of the
money was utilized for construction of a residential building. Even
thereafter, she was subjected to harassment demanding dowry. In the
month of January, 2014, the applicant went abroad for employment.
According to her, when she was persistently harassed, her father
amassed a sum of Rs.5 lakhs and the same was handed over to the
accused. In the month of July, 2014, when the de facto complainant
refused the request of the applicant to withdraw money from her bank
account, she was assaulted. She further alleges that she became
Bail Appl..No. 803 of 2019 3
pregnant and she was ordered to abort the pregnancy. She was
assaulted when she refused to accede to his request. She further
states that she delivered twin babies in the month of August, 2016.
Later, in the month of May, 2017, a sum of Rs.10 lakhs was
demanded. When she refused, she was intimidated by brandishing
weapons. The learned Magistrate before whom the complaint was
filed, forwarded the same to the police and the crime was registered.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant would
contend that there is no truth in the allegations. According to the
learned counsel, the applicant had been toiling hard in a hostile
environment with the sole objective of providing a good life to his wife
and two minor children. Other than minor differences which occur in
all matrimonial homes, nothing untoward has happened between the
applicant and his wife. Though it is alleged that from the date of
marriage, the applicant has been harassing the de facto complainant,
she never had an occasion to lodge a complaint earlier. It is submitted
that the treatment records of the de facto complainant relating to her
pregnancy was produced before the court by her to substantiate her
case that she was manhandled. According to the learned counsel,
Bail Appl..No. 803 of 2019 4
those documents would only show that she had suffered from bleeding
prior to delivering twin babies. It is urged that the complaint has been
lodged in the heat of the moment and if the applicant herein is
arrested and remanded, the chances of settlement and reunion will be
irrevocably ruined.
5. Heard the learned Pubic Prosecutor, who has made available
the case diary. It appears that certain medical records have been
produced by the de facto complainant, which would reveal that she
was admitted in the hospital for few days in the month of January
2016. The details of the strained relationship from 2013 is raised in
the complaint. Having regard to the fact that the marriage is still
subsisting and the spouses have two children in the wedlock, I am of
the view that sending the applicant herein to prison is not warranted
in the case on hand. By imposing stringent conditions to safeguard the
interest of the prosecution, he can be granted relief.
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
Bail Appl..No. 803 of 2019 5
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:
(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and
shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every
Saturdays between 10 A.M and 1 P.M. for a period of two
months 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 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
DSV/15.2.19 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
