IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2009 / 22ND SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4259 of 2009() --------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 239/2009 OF PALLICKATHODU POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- RAJU V. JOSE, S/O. JOSEPH, RESIDING AT VADAKKEL HOUSE, MANALUNKAL P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP RESPONDENT: ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 4259 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of August, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.239/2009 of Pallickathodu Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 20/7/2009, the defacto complainant, who is the wife of the accused was attacked by the accused and thereby she sustained injuries. She had undergone nasal bone surgery. It is alleged that the petitioner was consistently harassing her demanding dowry. 4. The petitioner has a different story to say. He is a flourishing businessman and he has several business units in Kottayam District. His son is studying in Australia. Annexure 1 copy of the account of I.C.I.C.I bank is produced by the petitioner to show that the defacto complainant was dealing with lakhs of rupees belonging to the petitioner and it is quite B.A. No. 4259/2009 Page numbers improbable that the petitioner would make demand for dowry, as alleged in the F.I.R.. The petitioner also relies on Annexure II petition dated 13/01/2009 submitted by him before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kanjirappally, wherein an allegation was made that huge amounts from his account were taken by the defacto complainant, her brother and an employee of the petitioner. It is submitted that the present case is a foisted one to escape from the other liabilities of the defacto complainant. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on every Monday for a period of one month. B) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and B.A. No. 4259/2009 Page numbers when required; C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm