IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 1ST MAGHA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 100 of 2019
CRIME NO. 1416/2018 OF Chirayinkeezhu Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED:
SHARJAIN, AGED 35 YEARS,
S/O KASSIM PILLAI, CHERUVILAKOM HOUSE,
KOIYACODE.P.O, VELLAVOOR, NEDUMANGADU TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM-682031,(REPRESENTING THE STATION HOUSE
OFFICER, CHIRAYINKEEZHU
POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM).
SRI. AMJAD ALI, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.01.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 100 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.1416
of 2018 of the Chirayinkeezhu Police Station, registered at the
instance of his wife under Section 498A of the IPC.
3. According to the de facto complainant, the marriage
between the applicant herein and his wife was solemnized on
14.08.2008. Thereafter, the applicant and his family members are
alleged to have subjected her to ill treatment demanding dowry.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant
submitted that the allegations are untrue. According to the
learned counsel, the de facto complainant has already initiated
proceedings for realization of money before the Family Court,
which is pending. It is in order to strengthen the civil matters that
the subject crime has been registered on frivolous accusations.
5. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor, who opposed
Bail Appl..No. 100 of 2019 3
the prayer. In the facts and circumstances, it would be sufficient if
the applicant is ordered to co-operate with the investigation,
submits the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced. After
going through the materials on record, 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:
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.
Bail Appl..No. 100 of 2019 4
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/- //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE