IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2008 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4034 of 2008() -------------------------------------- (CR.NO.504/08 OF PAVARATTY POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ 1. CHACKY, AGED 72 YEARS, W/O.LATE VELAYUDHAN, THOOMATT HOUSE, VENMANAD P.O., PAVARATTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. BAHULEYAN, THUMMAT HOUSE, PAVARATTY, VENMANAD P.O., THRISSUR. 3. SAVITHRI BAHULEYAN, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O.T.V.BAHULEYAN, RESIDING -DO- BY ADV. SRI.P.K.ANIL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. AMMU, W/O.VELU, KANGAVEETTIL HOUSE, KADAPARAMBU LANE, TRICHUR. 2. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PAVARATTY POLICE STATION. 3. STATE REP: BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4034 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of October, 2008 O R D E R The petitioners face allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 498A I.P.C. The petitioners are the mother-in-law, brother-in-law and the wife of the brother-in-law of a deceased young woman, who had remained in marriage for four years with her husband. She attempted to commit suicide and later succumbed to the injuries suffered. Crime was registered alleging offences under Sections 309 and 498A r/w. 34 I.P.C. 2. The crux of the allegations is that the deceased was tormented by the petitioners and on account of cruelty inflicted on her, she allegedly attempted to commit suicide. Her husband has not been made an accused so far. The petitioners' application for anticipatory bail stands rejected and they have now come before this Court with this petition to quash the F.I.R. registered against them on 15.9.2008, the incident having taken place on 14.9.2008. Investigation is in progress. Crl.M.C.No. 4034 of 2008 2 3. At the moment and with the available inputs, I find absolutely no justification in the prayer for invocation of the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the F.I.R. registered against the petitioners. Whether the allegations are true or false cannot evidently be decided at this stage and with the available inputs. A proper investigation will have to be conducted and truth must be ascertained by the Investigating Officer. The petitioners, whose application for anticipatory was dismissed, must choose to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate. No special directions appears to be necessary. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the first petitioner is an aged woman (about 75 years) and petitioner No.3 is also a woman. Allegations are totally unjustified. In these circumstances appropriate directions may be issued under Section 482 Cr.P.C. it is prayed. 5. It is for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate or the Investigating Officer and then seek regular bail. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not Crl.M.C.No. 4034 of 2008 3 consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioners when they surrender before the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No special or specific direction appears to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have already been issued by this Court in the decision in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). If there be non-compliance, the avenues of challenge/complaint are available to the petitioners. 4. This application is dismissed, but with the above specific observations. (R. BASANT) Judge tm