IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2008 / 28TH ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6478 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 378/2008 OF EDACHERY POLICE STATION PETITONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1: --------------------------------- NOUFAL, S/O.MAYANKUTTY HAJI, AGED 26 YEARS, KANNIPOYIL HOUSE, KARTHIKAPALLI P.O., VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.KUNHABDULLA RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY S.I OF POLICE, EDACHERY THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. ASLAM, S/O.MOIDU, UNIKORAN KANDY HOUSE, OORATH P.O., KUTTIADY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6478 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of October,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 498A and 34 IPC. According to the prosecution, de facto complainant was physically and mentally harassed by petitioner (A1) and his relatives (accused 2 to 4). Accused 2 and 3 are the mother-in- law and the sister-in-law of de facto complainant. Accused No.4 is the maternal uncle of the 1st accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. There was no harassment either from petitioner or from the family members on de facto complainant. On the other hand, the marital relationship was strained within two days of the marriage. The marriage was on 16-7-2008 and on the very next day on wards there was a rumor that de facto complainant was earlier married and divorced. On hearing this, 2nd accused who is the mother-in- law of de facto complainant requested her brother (A4) to come over for a discussion in the matter. On knowing this, de facto complainant left the house on 19-7-2008. BA 6478/08 -2- 4. Thereafter, on 1-8-2008, after confirming that de facto complainant was earlier married and this fact was suppressed, divorce was effected by pronouncing “Talak” as evidenced by Annexures 1 and 2. The information was conveyed to de facto complainant's father also over phone. Immediately on the second day, on 3-8-2008 the complaint was lodged making allegations against petitioner and others. It is submitted that anticipatory bail application filed by the 4th accused was dismissed, since no sufficient materials were available at that time to convince the court regarding the situation. Now documents are produced to support the contentions made. Hence, anticipatory bail may be granted, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order is passed:- (1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned and he shall be released on bail, on his executing a bond for Rs. 25,000/- with two solvent sureties each, for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, on the following conditions:- BA 6478/08 -3- i) Petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when directed and co-operate with the investigation. ii) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence any witness or tamper with evidence or commit any offence while on bail. This petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.