IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 5177 of 2008()
1. MOHAMMED RAFEEQUE T.S.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE - REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
... Respondent
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.SASINDRAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :26/11/2008
O R D E R
K. HEMA, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A. No. 5177 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 26th day of November,2008
O R D E R
Petition for anticipatory bail.
2. According to prosecution, de facto complainant’s
brother-in-law and his nephew went to de facto complainant’s
house and assaulted her and committed offences under sections
452, 323, 354, 294(b) read with section 34 IPC. The offences
were committed because de facto complainant ousted another
brother’s wife from the house.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that
petitioner is 2nd accused in the crime. De facto complainant and
accused are close relatives. There was some difference of opinion
but the present allegations made are not correct. It is also
submitted that matter is settled between the parties and hence,
petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. A compromise is also
produced as Annexure-AIII.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this petition and
submitted that in the nature of the allegations made, It is not fit
to grant anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that the matter was
referred to the Lok Adalath by this Court and it was sent back
stating that there was no possibility of settlement. Though
petitioner would claim that the matter was settled, there is no
BA 5177/08 -2-
information to the police regarding any such settlement. Since it
was stated that the case was settled at the police station, this fact
was ascertained and it is submitted that the matter was not
settled.
5. On hearing both sides, I am not persuaded to act upon
the alleged settlement. Considering the nature of the allegations
made, I find that it is not fit to grant anticipatory bail. The offence
was committed as early as on 22-7-2008 and the crime was
registered on 23-7-2008. Petitioner is required for investigation.
Petitioner is directed to surrender before the
Investigating Officer without any delay and co-
operate with the investigation. Whether he
surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him
and proceed in accordance with law.
With this direction, this petition is dismissed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE.
mn.