IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 1806 of 2010()
1. HARI @ HARIDAS, AGED 31 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SMT.P.K.PRIYA
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :26/03/2010
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
B.A.No.1806 of 2010
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of March, 2010
O R D E R
This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the sole accused
in Crime No.117 of 2010 of Chandera Police Station.
2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under
Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is that on 2.3.2010, one Geetha,
aged 37 years, committed suicide. Her husband Krishnan was
conducting a textile shop. He died due to heart attack about
nine months back. There are two children born in the wedlock of
Krishnan and Geetha. The petitioner was closely moving with
the family. He is an autorickshaw driver by profession. He used
to take the autorickshaw belonging to Geetha. He was also
assisting her in the textile business.
4. The petitioner surrendered before court on 12.3.2010
and he was remanded to judicial custody.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner is not at all responsible for the death of Geetha.
BA No.1806/2010 2
There is no material to connect the petitioner with the offence.
6. I have perused the case diary file and also the suicide
note of Geetha. Prima facie, I am not inclined to accept the
contention of the petitioner that there is no material to connect
the petitioner with the offence. The suicide note indicates that
the petitioner is responsible for the suicide of Geetha.
7. The investigation is in progress. If the petitioner is
released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the
proper investigation of the case. Deceased Krishnan had several
money transactions. The petitioner was in charge of collecting
money from various debtors. Naturally, investigation in respect
of those transactions would be required and the complicity of the
petitioner has to be ascertained. If the petitioner is released on
bail at this stage, he would be able to influence or intimidate the
witnesses and the persons who are aware of several facts.
For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed.
K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl