IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 5190 of 2007()
1. ALDRIN GEORGE, S/O VARGHESE,
... Petitioner
2. VARGHESE, AGED 70 YEARS,
3. ESTHER, W/O VARGHESE, AGED 65 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :05/09/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A.No. 5190 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 5th day of September, 2007
O R D E R
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners face
allegations, inter alia, under Section 498A I.P.C. They are the
husband, father-n-law, aged 70 years and mother-in-law, aged 65
years, of the defacto complainant. Crime has been registered on the
basis of a private complaint filed by the defacto complainant before
the learned Magistrate which was referred by the learned Magistrate
to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Investigation is in
progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
marriage had taken place in 2002. One child has been born in the
wedlock. There is strain in the matrimony and on account of such
strain vexatious allegations are raised against the petitioners. At any
rate, exaggerated and fanciful allegations raised by the defacto
complainant may not expose the petitioners to suffer the undeserved
trauma of arrest and incarceration in prison. They are willing to co-
operate with the investigation. Subject to any conditions, anticipatory
bail may be granted to the petitioners, it is prayed.
B.A.No. 5190 of 2007
2
3. The learned Prosecutor does not oppose the application. He
submits that there is no specific allegation of any physical cruelty resulting
in any injuries. The State has no objection against grant of anticipatory
bail to the petitioners, subject to appropriate conditions, submits the
Prosecutor. I reckon the stand taken by the learned Prosecutor as
absolutely reasonable. I am satisfied that this is a fit case where directions
under Section 438 Cr.P.C. can be issued in favour of the petitioners. In
coming to this conclusion I take note of the reality that arrest and
incarceration of the petitioners is likely to mar all possibilities of
reconciliation of marital relationship. Subject to appropriate conditions,
anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.
4. In the result:
(1) This application is allowed.
(2) The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
(a) The petitioners shall surrender before the learned Magistrate on
11.9.2007 at 11 a.m. The learned Magistrate shall release the petitioners on
regular bail on condition that they execute bonds for Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for
the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.
B.A.No. 5190 of 2007
2
(b) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation
before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. on 12.9.07 and
13.9.2007 and thereafter shall appear on all Mondays and Fridays between
10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of two months and subsequently as and
when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.
(d) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned Magistrate as
directed in clause (1) above, these directions shall lapse on 11.9.06 and the
police shall be at liberty thereafter to arrest the petitioners and deal with
them in accordance with law.
(b) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender on
11.9.2006 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be released on bail on
their executing bonds for Rs.25,000/- each without any surety undertaking
to appear before the learned Magistrate on 11.9.2007.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm