SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vipin vs State Of Kerala on 20 November, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 29TH KARTHIKA, 1941

Bail Appl..No.7823 OF 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1847/2019 OF DISTRICT COURT
SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR

CRIME NO.902/2019 OF Kunnamkulam Police Station , Thrissur

PETITIONERS:

1 VIPIN
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O RAVIKUMAR,KARUMATHIL HOUSE,
CHOWANNUR.P.O,KUNNAMKULAM,
THRISSUR-680517.

2 USHA,
AGED 52 YEARS
W/O.RAVIKUMAR,KARUMATHIL HOUSE,
CHOWANNUR.P.O,KUNNAMKULAM,
THRISSUR-680517.

BY ADVS.
SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)
SRI.P.M.RAFIQ
SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN
SRI.V.C.SARATH
SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN
SRI.THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
SRI.AJEESH K.SASI
SMT.POOJA PANKAJ
SRUTHY N. BHAT

RESPONDENT:

STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA,
ERNAKULAM-682031.

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.7823 OF 2019

2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J

BA No. 7823/2019

Dated this the 20th day of November 2019

The petitioners herein have been initially arrayed as the accused 1

and 2 in the instant subject crime in this case, crime no. 902/2019 of

Kunnamkulam police station which has been initially registered for

offences punishable under Sectionsections 174 of the Cr.PC on account of the

unnatural death/suicide of the lady victim in this case. The police after

investigation had thereafter altered the offence to that as per Sectionsection 306

and Sectionsection 498-A of the IPC and have arrayed the 2 petitioners herein as

accused nos. 1 and 2. Thereafter the police has deleted the 1 st petitioner

(A1) from the accused array and now the sole accused in the instant case is

the 2nd petitioner herein. The lady victim in this case is the wife of the 1 st

petitioner herein and the daughter in law of the 2 nd petitioner herein. The

2nd petitioner herein is the mother of the 1 st petitioner herein and the

mother-in-law of the deceased lady victim.

2. The prosecution case in short is that, the 2 nd petitioner who is

the mother-in-law of the deceased victim used to harass and quarrel with

the lady victim who had married her son about 5 months prior and that she

has therefore abetted the lady victim to commit suicide and that as she has

committed cruelty and harassment, she has also committed offence as per
Bail Appl..No.7823 OF 2019

3

Sectionsection 498A of the IPC.

3. Counsel for the petitioners would point out that the above said

allegations are false and baseless and that the above said prosecution

materials now available, cannot even remotely connect the 2 nd petitioner

with the ingredients of the offence of abetment as per Sectionsection 107 of the IPC

and that prosecution has not been able to even properly establish that the

2nd petitioner has done any act with the mens rea to instigate and goad the

victim to commit suicide. Further learned for the petitioner would place

reliance on various rulings of Apex Court and of this Court which has laid

down the vital parameters and ingredients of the offence of abetment to

commit suicide as per Sectionsection 107 of the IPC by citing decisions as per

decisions in SectionChithresh Kumar Chopra v. State [AIR 2010 SC 1446],

wherein it has been held that the act of instigation is to goad, urge forward,

provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. The learned counsel has also

taken this Court’s attention to the decision of this Court in SectionHarikrishnan

and another v. State of Kerala [2019 (3) KHC 437] which in turn has

relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Chithresh Kumar

Chopra’s case (supra). The learned counsel for the petitioner has also

taken this Court’s attention to various other rulings of the Apex Court and

this Court in cases as in SectionSanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar v. State of M.P.

[ 2002 SCC (Crl.) 1141], Krishnadas v State of Kerala [2017 (2) KLT 579],
Bail Appl..No.7823 OF 2019

4

Gurucharan Singh v State of Punjab [2016 (12) SCALE 414],

Harikrishnan Anr. v State of Kerala and Anr. [2019 (3) KHC 437]

4. Prosecutor has pointed out that the investigating officer in the

course of investigation has collected statements from the various witnesses

like immediate neighbors of the 2nd petitioner and many of them have

stated that they could quite often hear the 2nd petitioner very often

quarreling with the lady victim. Further that IO has also collected

statements from the parents and other relatives of the lady victim that the

victim had told them that the 2nd petitioner used to frequently quarrel and

harass the lady victim and that the victim found it unbearable to live with

the 2nd petitioner.

5. Counsel for the petitioners would point out that the petitioners

have received many whatsapp messages from close relatives of the lady

victim which has indicated that the lady was prone to mood swings.

Counsel for the petitioners would point out that this Court may grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to any strict conditions that may

be deemed appropriate. Learned prosecutor has seriously opposed the plea

for anticipatory bail.

6. After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of facts and

circumstances of this case and also testing the facts of the case in the light

of the above said judicial precedence which has laid down the parameters
Bail Appl..No.7823 OF 2019

5

and vital ingredients of offence of abetment as per Sectionsection 107 of the IPC

and the offence of abetment to commit suicide as per Sectionsection 306 of the

IPC, this Court is inclined to take the view that custodial interrogation of

the 2nd petitioner may not be really necessary for effectuating the smooth

and fair conduct of investigation in this case.

7. However, the petitioner will have to immediately appear before

the IO for interrogation process. Hence the following directions and orders

are passed.

1. The petitioners will have to immediately personally appear before the
investigation officer concerned in relation to this case for
interrogation purposes without any further delay at any rate by 9 am
on any day on or before 6/12/2019.

2. Petitioners will have to fully co-operate with the IO in the
interrogation process.

3. After the interrogation process is over, in case the petitioners are
arrested by the IO in relation to this case, then they shall be released
on bail on their separately executing bond for Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees
Fourty Thousand only) each and on their separately furnishing 2
solvent sureties each for the like sum, both to the satisfaction of the
Investigating Officer concerned.

8. However, the grant of bail may be subject to the following

conditions.

1. The petitioners shall not involve in any criminal offences of similar
nature.

2. The petitioners shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

3. The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer as and
Bail Appl..No.7823 OF 2019

6

when required in that connection.

4. The petitioners shall not influence witness or shall not tamper or
attempt to tamper evidence in any manner, whatsoever.

5. If there is any violation of the abovesaid conditions by the
petitioners then the jurisdictional court concerned will stand
hereby empowered to consider the plea for cancellation of bail at
the appropriate time.

With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application

will stand disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS

Nsd JUDGE
//true copy//
Pa to Judge

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