High Court Kerala High Court

Manikantan vs State Of Kerala on 3 October, 2007

Kerala High Court
Manikantan vs State Of Kerala on 3 October, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 5966 of 2007()


1. MANIKANTAN, AGED 42 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. LATHIKA, D/O. CHELLAMMA, AGED 40 YRS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.JAYAPRADEEP

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :03/10/2007

 O R D E R
                          R. BASANT, J.
            -------------------------------------------------
                     B.A. No. 5966 OF 2007
            -------------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2007

                               ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the

husband of the de facto complainant. He faces allegations in a

crime registered under Sec.498A of the IPC. The gravamen of

the allegations is that the petitioner is compelling the de facto

complainant/wife to sell certain items of property. The

marriage took place on 6/1/95. No issues are born in the wed-

lock. It was the second marriage of both the spouses. There

is strain in the matrimony. Because of such strain, false,

frivolous and vexatious allegations are being raised against the

petitioner, it is submitted. The learned counsel for the

petitioner, in these circumstances, prays that anticipatory bail

may be granted to the petitioner.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the

B.A. No. 5966 OF 2007 -: 2 :-

said prayer. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that there is

no specific allegation of any physical cruelty also. I am satisfied,

in these circumstances, that the anticipatory bail can be granted

to the petitioner. In coming to this conclusion, I take note the

reality that the arrest and incarceration of the petitioner is likely

to mar all chances of harmonious resolution of the matrimonial

dispute.

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

directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C:

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned

Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 9/10/07. He shall be

released on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-

with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction

of the learned Magistrate.

(ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for

interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m.

and 3 p.m. on 10/10/07 and 11/10/07 and thereafter on all

Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period

of two months. Subsequently, he shall so make himself available

for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when

directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.

(iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned

B.A. No. 5966 OF 2007 -: 3 :-

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

thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to

arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as

if these directions were not issued at all;

(iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender

on 9/10/07 as directed in clause (i) above, he shall be released on

his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any sureties

undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 9/10/07.

Sd/-

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/

//true copy//

P.S. to Judge