IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
Bail Appl..No.8042 OF 2019
CRIME NO.663/2019 OF MARAYAMUTTOM POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED:
SHEEJA C V
AGED 28 YEARS, W/O.ANEESH,
RESIDING PALLITHAZHATHU VEEDU,
VAVODU, VAZHICHAL.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.G.SUDHEER
SRI.R.HARIKRISHNAN (H-308)
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
KOCHI-682031.
SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.8042 OF 2019
2
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
B.A No.8042 of 2019
Dated this the 25th day of November, 2019
ORDER
The petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused No.4 among the
four accused in the instant Crime No.663/2019 of Marayamuttom Police
Station, registered for offences punishable under Secs.306, 498A 304B
read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. The subject crime was initially
registered on 26.08.2019 under Sec.174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 on account of the suicide of the lady victim in this case, who is the
daughter of the first informant/de facto complainant. The 1 st accused is the
husband of the deceased lady victim. The police after investigation have
altered the offences to those punishable as per the above referred offences
and the accused persons have been arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 4 therein.
The accused Nos.2 3 are the father and mother respectively of A-1 and
the petitioner herein (A-4) is the sister of A-1.
2. According to the learned prosecutor, during the course of the
investigation, they could recover a diary note said to have been written by the
Bail Appl..No.8042 OF 2019
3
deceased victim, wherein she has stated that the abovesaid four accused
persons are responsible for her death. According to the prosecution, the
accused persons are subjected the lady victim to constant ill-treatment and
cruelty and they had repeatedly demanded dowry, etc.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that A-4,
who is the sister of A-1, is a married lady and that she is living about
36 kms. away from the marital home of A-1 and the deceased victim, but
for certain functions she has been always living separately in her own
house, which is quite far away and further that the prosecution has not
been able to get any documentary evidence to connect the petitioner with
the ingredients for the offence of abetment to commit suicide.
4. After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of the facts
and circumstances of this case and more particularly, testing the facts of
the case in the light of the judicial reasonings, which has laid down the
ingredients necessary for the offence of abetment as per Sec.107 of the IPC
and the offence of abetment to commit suicide under Sec.306 of the IPC,
etc., this Court is inclined to take the view that the custodial interrogation
of the petitioner (A-4) may not be necessary, for effectuating the fair and
proper conduct of the investigation. Accordingly, it is ordered that in the
Bail Appl..No.8042 OF 2019
4
event of the petitioner being arrested in relation to the instant crime, then
she shall be released on bail on her executing bond for Rs.40,000/-
(Rupees Forty Thousand only) and on her furnishing two solvent sureties
for the like sum each, both to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer
concerned. However, the above order shall be subject to the following
conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal offences of
similar nature.
(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.
5. If the petitioner violates 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 law.
6. It is pointed out that the petitioner was earlier pregnant and she
was given birth to a baby on 11.11.2019 and that she would appear for
interrogation process before the Investigating Officer, immediately after
she is medically fit for such purpose. Taking note of the abovesaid aspect it
Bail Appl..No.8042 OF 2019
5
is ordered that –
The Investigating Officer will issue notice to the petitioner to appear
before him for interrogation purposes, after some time and after
ascertaining about the medical fitness to appear before him for
interrogation process, as she has recently delivered a child.
With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application
will stand disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
vgd