SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ummarkutty Nazar vs State Of Kerala on 16 October, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR

WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019/24TH ASWINA, 1941

Bail Appln.No.7187 OF 2019

CRIME NO.1850/2019 OF Changanassery Police Station,
Kottayam District

PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED:

UMMARKUTTY NAZAR,
AGED 55 YEARS,
S/O.UMMARKUTTY,
VARAMBATHU HOUSE,
PERUNNA EAST.P.O.,
CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM.

BY ADVS.
SMT.HYMA.S
SRI.M.K.SHAJI
SMT.LISHA.M.G.

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CHANGANASSERY POLICE STATION,
THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, HIGH COURT.P.O.,
ERNAKULAM – 682031.

SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.M.S.BREEZE

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 16.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appln.No.7187 of 2019

..2..

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under

Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime

No.1850/2019 of Changanassery Police Station for the

offences punishable under Sections 498A and 120B read with

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case in brief is as hereinbelow:-

The petitioner had married the de facto complainant

on 21.9.1997 in accordance with the religious rites prevailing

among their community and after that they had been living as

husband and wife at Kayamkulam at the residence of the

petitioner. Out of the wedlock, the couple had two children.

Way back in the year 2007, the petitioner had purchased

property at Changanassery and the couple with the children

had started living there. The allegation is that, while so the

petitioner developed an illicit intimacy with the 2 nd accused in

this crime and started to harass and ill-treat the de facto

complainant both physically and mentally.
Bail Appln.No.7187 of 2019

..3..

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The First Information Report placed on record would

show that the de facto complainant filed a private complaint

before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I,

Changanassery, which in turn sent for investigation under

Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. Consequently, the police registered

crime for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and

120B read with Section 34 of IPC against accused Nos.1 and 2.

There is no case for the de facto complainant that the 1 st

accused who is the petitioner herein married the 2 nd accused

during the subsistence of a valid marriage with the de facto

complainant. Her only case is that the petitioner who is none

other than her husband had subjected her to cruelty in

collusion with the 2nd accused. Chapter XXA of the Indian Penal

Code provides punishment for subjecting a married woman to

cruelty either by the husband or relatives of the husband.

There is no case for the prosecution that the 2 nd accused is the

relative of the 1st petitioner. The case of the prosecution is
Bail Appln.No.7187 of 2019

..4..

that the 1st accused subjected the de facto complainant to

cruelty which is certainly a matrimonial offence relating to

marriage as provided under Chapter Chapter XXA of the Indian

Penal Code. Considering the fact that the dispute between the

parties is purely a matrimonial dispute, this Court is of the

view that the petitioner can be released on pre-arrest bail.

6. In the result, the petition is allowed and it is

ordered as follows:-

1) The petitioner/1st accused shall be released on
bail in the event of his arrest by the police in
Crime No.1850 of 2019 of Changanassery
Police Station on his executing a bond for
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with
two solvent sureties each for the like amount
to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

2) The petitioner/1st accused shall appear before
the Investigating Officer as and when directed
by him in writing to do so.

3) The petitioner/1st accused shall not in any
manner intimidate or influence the prosecution
witnesses.

Bail Appln.No.7187 of 2019

..5..

4) If the petitioner/1st accused violates any of the
above conditions of bail, it is open to the Court
having jurisdiction over the case to cancel his
bail without any further orders from this Court
but in accordance with law.

Sd/-

N.ANIL KUMAR,
JUDGE

skj

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation