High Court Kerala High Court

Manikandan vs The State Of Kerala on 23 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
Manikandan vs The State Of Kerala on 23 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 4439 of 2007()


1. MANIKANDAN, S/O.RAMAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. BALAMANI AMMA, W/O.RAMAN NAIR,
3. MAHINDRAN, S/O.RAMAN NAIR,
4. SUMA, D/O.RAMAN NAIR,

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BABU S. NAIR

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :23/07/2007

 O R D E R
                                R. BASANT, J.

                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                         B.A.No.  4439  of   2007

                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                   Dated this the 23rd day of   July, 2007


                                    O R D E R

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are husband

and relatives of the husband of the defacto complainant. They face

allegations in a crime registered under Section 498A I.P.C. The

crime has been registered on the basis of a private complaint filed

before the learned Magistrate and referred to the police under Section

156(3) Cr.P.C. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners

apprehend imminent arrest.

2. The marriage had taken place in 2003. The spouses are

blessed with a child. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits

that merely because of the strain in the matrimony, untenable

allegations are raised to vex and harass the petitioners. Anticipatory

bail may, in these circumstances, be granted to the petitioners, it is

prayed.

3. The learned Prosecutor does not fairly oppose the

application, but only prays that appropriate conditions may be

imposed. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I reckon that as

B.A.No. 4439 of 2007

2

an informed and fair stand taken by the learned Prosecutor. I am satisfied in

the circumstances of this case that appropriate direction under Section 438

Cr.P.C. can be issued in favour of the petitioner. In coming to this

conclusion I take note of the reality that if the petitioners were arrested and

detained in custody, that would mar all possibilities of reconciliation of

marital relationship.

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

30.7.2007 at 11 a.m. The learned Magistrate shall release them on regular

bail on condition that they execute bonda 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) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation

before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 31.7.07 and

1.8.2007 and thereafter 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.

B.A.No. 4439 of 2007

3

(c) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned Magistrate as

directed in clause (1) above, these directions shall lapse on 30.7.06 and the

police shall be at liberty thereafter to arrest the petitioners and deal with

them in accordance with law.

(d) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender on

30.7.2006 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be released from

custody on their executing bonds for Rs.25,000/- each without any surety

undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 30.7.2007.

(R. BASANT)

Judge

tm