High Court Kerala High Court

Joby.M.John vs State Of Kerala on 26 September, 2007

Kerala High Court
Joby.M.John vs State Of Kerala on 26 September, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 5847 of 2007()


1. JOBY.M.JOHN, AGED 34,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. CHINNAMA JOHN, AGED 55,
3. JOHN, AGED 58,
4. JOMY TOJO,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :26/09/2007

 O R D E R
                           R.BASANT, J.
                        ----------------------
                        B.A.No.5847 of 2007
                    ----------------------------------------
            Dated this the 26th day of September 2007


                               O R D E R

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are

husband of the de facto complainant and his relatives. They face

allegations under Section 498A I.P.C. There was an allegation

under Section 324 I.P.C also; but later the said allegation has

been deleted. Crime was registered on the basis of a private

complaint filed before the learned Magistrate and referred by

the learned Magistrate to the police under Section 156(3)

Cr.P.C. Marriage took place on 12/10/2003. The spouses are

blessed with one child. Matrimonial proceedings are pending

before the matrimonial courts. Investigation is in progress. The

petitioners apprehend imminent arrest.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

because of the strain in the matrimony, exaggerated, false and

fanciful allegations are being raised by the de facto complainant.

It is prayed that directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C may be

issued to save the petitioners from the undeserved trauma of

arrest and detention.

B.A.No.5847/07 2

3. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the

said prayer. I reckon the stand taken by the learned Public

Prosecutor is fair and reasonable. I take note of the reality that

the arrest and incarceration of the petitioners is likely to close

the doors of any attempt of harmonious settlement of the

matrimonial dispute. I do further note that there is absolutely no

specific physical injury corresponding to the allegations of

cruelty raised. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that

subject to appropriate conditions, anticipatory bail can be

granted.

4. 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 03/10/2007.

ii) 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.

B.A.No.5847/07 3

iii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for

interrogation before the investigating officer between 10 a.m

and 1 p.m on 04/10/2007 and 05/10/2007 and thereafter on all

Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m and 1 p.m 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.

(iv) 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 to

arrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law,

as if these directions were not issued at all.

(v) If they were arrested prior to 03/10/2007, 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

03/10/2007.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr

B.A.No.5847/07 4

B.A.No.5847/07 5

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007