High Court Kerala High Court

Anwar Hussain Aged 35 Years vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 28 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
Anwar Hussain Aged 35 Years vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 28 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 464 of 2008()


1. ANWAR HUSSAIN AGED 35 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. NABEESA, AGED 50 YEARS,
3. P.J.ABDULLA, AGED 60 YEARS,
4. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, AGED 25 YEARS,

                        Vs



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

2. SHAHIDA BANU, AGED 28 YEARS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.ANAND

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :28/01/2008

 O R D E R
                             R. BASANT, J.


             ````````````````````````````````````````````````````

                       B.A. No. 464 OF 2008 E

             ````````````````````````````````````````````````````

            Dated this the 28th day of January, 2008


                                O R D E R

Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners face

allegations for offences punishable under Sections 420 and

498A IPC. The petitioners are the husband of the de facto

complainant and his relatives. Crime has been registered on

the basis of a private complaint filed by the de facto

complainant and referred by the learned Magistrate to the

police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

2. Marriage between the spouses took place on

29.7.07 under peculiar circumstances. The de facto

complainant was scheduled to get married to another person.

But, on account of some unforeseen reason, that marriage did

not take place and the de facto complainant was given in

marriage to the 1st petitioner herein on the very same day by

the relatives. They lived together and the de facto

BA.464/08

: 2 :

complainant is now pregnant. They were living together till

18.11.07. It is the case of the de facto complainant that the

fact that the petitioner was earlier married and has two

children, was suppressed from the de facto complainant and

her relatives, when the petitioner got married to the de facto

complainant. It is further alleged that on 18.11.07 when the

separate residence commenced, there was an assault of the

de facto complainant by the petitioner. Crime has been

registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners

apprehend imminent arrest.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

the allegations of cheating, assault, cruelty, etc. are being

raised without any bona fides. The parties knew each other

very well and it was known to everyone that the 1st petitioner

had an earlier marriage and children in such wedlock. In spite

of that, the marriage between the 1st petitioner and the de

facto complainant took place in peculiar circumstances and it

was willingly and with complete knowledge of all the

BA.464/08

: 3 :

circumstances that the marriage between them took place.

Now, because of some strain in matrimony, false and

vexatious allegations are being raised. The de facto

complainant has not suffered any injury eventhough it is seen

that she had gone to the doctor on 22.11.07 after the spouses

started separate residence. The de facto complainant is now

pregnant also. In these circumstances, subject to any

appropriate conditions, anticipatory bail may be granted to the

petitioners, it is prayed.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the

application and having considered all the relevant

circumstances, I am satisfied that the petitioners can be

granted anticipatory bail. In the absence of opposition, it is

not necessary for me to advert to the facts in any greater

detail. I need only say that I do take note the peculiar

circumstances under which the marriage took place as also

the fact that the de facto complainant is now pregnant.

Appropriate conditions can of course be imposed.

BA.464/08

: 4 :

5. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following

directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C in favour of

the petitioners.

i) Petitioners shall surrender before the learned

Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m on 04.02.2008. They

shall be released 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.

ii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for

interrogation before the investigating officer between 10 a.m

and 3 p.m on 5.2.08 and 6.2.08 and thereafter on all Mondays

and Fridays between 10 a.m and 12 noon for a period of two

months. Subsequently the petitioners shall so appear as and

when directed by the investigating officer in writing to do so.

(iii) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned

Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above

shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty

BA.464/08

: 5 :

to arrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with

law, as if these directions were not issued at all.

(iv) If they were arrested prior to 4.2.08, they shall be

released from custody on their executing a bond for

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) without any

sureties, undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate

on 4.2.08.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

aks