IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 5281 of 2007()
1. SUNIL, S/O.RAJAN ACHARI,
... Petitioner
2. RAJAN ACHARI, S/O.SANKARAN ACHARI,
3. OMANA, D/O.CHELLAMMA,
4. SURESH, S/O.RAJAN ACHARI,
5. SUNDARESHAN, S/O.RAJAN ACHARI,
6. SUSHEELA, W/O.CHELLAPPAN,
7. SUMA, W/O.BABU,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SAJU.S.A
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :06/09/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A.No. 5281 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 6th day of September, 2007
O R D E R
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are husband
of the defacto complainant and his relatives. The petitioners face
allegations in a crime registered, inter alia, under Section 498A I.P.C.
2. The facts appear to be weired. The marriage between the
first petitioner and the defacto complainant took place on 19.8.2007.
On 20.8.07 the defacto complainant was before the local Sub
Inspector raising an allegation of matrimonial cruelty. Crime has
been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners
apprehend imminent arrest.
3. The crux of the allegations against the petitioners is that the
defacto complainant’s request to continue her education was turned
down. Abusive words were used. She was allegedly told that she
had been married and brought into the family not for continuation of
her education, but to do work in the house hold.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there
were problems in the marriage and vexatious and exaggerated
B.A.No. 5281 of 2007
2
allegations are being made by the defacto complainant, who has influential
relatives in the police force, with the sole intention of harassing the
petitioners. In any event, directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C. may be
issued in favour of the petitioners, it is prayed.
5. The learned Prosecutor does not oppose the application. He
only submits that appropriate conditions may be imposed in the interests of
a fair, efficient and expeditious investigation. I find merit in the stand
taken by the learned Prosecutor. I am satisfied that directions under
Section 438 Cr.P.C. can be issued in favour of the petitioner. Arrest and
incarceration of the petitioner is likely to mar all possibilities of
reconciliation of marital relationship. Subject to appropriate conditions,
anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner.
6. In the result:
(1) This application is allowed.
(2) The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
(a) The petitioner shall surrender before the learned Magistrate on
12.9.2007 at 11 a.m. The learned Magistrate shall release the petitioner on
regular bail on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the
like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.
B.A.No. 5281 of 2007
3
(b) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation
before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 13.9.07,
and 14.9.2007 and thereafter on all Mondays and Fridays between 10
a.m. and 12 noon for a period of one month and subsequently as and when
directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.
(c) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as
directed in clause (1) above, these directions shall lapse on 12.9.07 and the
police shall be at liberty thereafter to arrest the petitioner and deal with him
in accordance with law.
(d) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 12.9.2007
as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released on bail on his executing
a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any surety undertaking to appear before the
learned Magistrate on 12.9.2007.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm