High Court Kerala High Court

Asma vs State Of Kerala on 19 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Asma vs State Of Kerala on 19 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 5578 of 2008()


1. ASMA,AGED 58 YEARS, D/O.MAMMOOTTY,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ZEENATH, AGED 36 YEARS, D/O.ASMA,
3. AYISHA, AGED 34 YEARS, D/O.ASMA,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :19/09/2008

 O R D E R
                                K. HEMA, J.
                 ------------------------------------------------
                   Bail Appl.No.5578 of 2008
                 ------------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 19th         day of September, 2008.

                                   ORDER

Petition for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offences are under Sections 498(A),

323 read with Section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, the de

facto complainant married the first accused and thereafter, they

went to Qatar. The first accused ill-treated the de facto

complainant by leaving her alone in the company of the friends,

which was not liked by the de facto complainant. They came

down to native place on 1.8.2008 in connection with the death of

first accused’ s father Thereafter, she left for her house and she

was brought back to the first accused’s house on 3.8.2008. She

was brutally attacked by the first accused and the petitioners

herein. She was hospitalised also. G.I. Pipe was used for

assaulting her, it is submitted.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is a

falsely foisted case. The de facto complainant was pregnant while

[B.A.No.5578/08] 2

she came down to the native place. She was medically advised to

take rest. After the death of first accused’s father, his mother was

alone in the house and hence she was asked to stay back at the

first accused’s house. This was not liked by the de facto

complainant and hence she filed this complaint, as instigated by

her brother and uncle, who arranged the marriage, it is

submitted. Petitioners are female members of the family and

they have not committed any offence. It is also pointed out that

wound certificate will show that no weapon was used as alleged.

4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor as

well as the learned counsel for de facto complainant were heard.

It was submitted by them that the allegations in the complaint

reveal the specific role of the petitioners in the offence. It was

pointed out that the wound certificate Annexure-I will disclose

that the alleged assault was by husband, mother in law and the

sister in law. The de facto complainant had sustained contusions

and also fracture. In the nature of allegations made that the de

facto complainant used to be left alone in the company of the

first accused’s friends while in Qatar also amounts to mental

cruelty and the disputes mainly arose because of such activities

of the first accused. Apart from this, there was demands for

[B.A.No.5578/08] 3

dowry also, it is submitted.

On hearing both sides, I do not find it a fit case to grant

anticipatory bail. Allegations are made against petitioners also.

Petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

K. HEMA, JUDGE.

Krs.