IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2008 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1842 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.95/08 OF PEERUMEDU POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ SUKUMARAN, AGED 65 YEARS, PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, KOCHUKARINTHARUVI KARA, ELAPPARA VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.P.P.BIJU RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No.1842 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the father-in-law of the deceased. The marriage took place on 29/3/2001. The spouses were blessed with two children aged 5 years and 3 years respectively. On 10/2/08 the unfortunate deceased attempted to commit suicide by consuming poison. She was taken to the hospital. She continued in such a stage in which her statement could not be recorded and ultimately expired on 25/2/08. On 26/2/08 a crime has been registered. Allegations of matrimonial cruelty are seen raised only against the petitioner/father-in-law, and not against the husband of the deceased. The deceased had left behind no suicide note. The petitioner is a 65 year old person. Investigation is in progress. He apprehends imminent arrest. B.A. No.1842 of 2008 -: 2 :- 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. The allegation raised against him is that he made demands for further amounts by way of dowry from the deceased. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was not a whisper of such an allegation at an earlier point of time. There were some disputes as to where the body was to be cremated. Because of such disputes, while the body was at the mortuary, the complaint was filed raising such false allegations. In any view of the matter, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. The sequence of events clearly reveal that the decision to commit suicide was not in any way prompted by any conduct on the part of the petitioner. The petitioner shall abide by all the appropriate conditions that this Court may impose, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. I have gone through the Case Diary. In particular, the learned Public Prosecutor has flagged the statement of the husband and I have gone through the same in detail. It is significant that no allegations are raised against the husband. The husband categorically asserts that there was a disagreement/dispute between the husband and the wife and they were not talking terms with each for a number of days prior B.A. No.1842 of 2008 -: 3 :- to the date on which she committed suicide. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that there was any such conduct on the part of the petitioner that had triggered her to commit suicide except the sweeping allegation for the anterior demands for dowry. The brother of the deceased also had committed suicide, it is submitted. 4. I am satisfied, in these circumstances, that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail. Appropriate conditions can, of course, be imposed to ensure the interests of a fair, efficient and expeditious investigation. 5. 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 7/4/08. 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 4 p.m. on 8/4/08 and 9/4/08. During this period the Investigator shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps for the proper conduct of the investigation. Thereafter the petitioner shall appear before B.A. No.1842 of 2008 -: 4 :- the Investigating Officer on all Mondays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of one month. 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 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 7/4/08 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 7/4/08. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge B.A. No.1842 of 2008 -: 5 :-