IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2008 / 29TH SRAVANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4858 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.130/2008 OF MARANALLOOR POLICE STATION PETITIONERS : ACCUSED 1 TO 5 ----------------- 1. RAMANI, D/O.RAJAMMA, RAMANI NIVAS, VELIYAMKODE, MARANALLOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VINOD, RAMANI NIVAS, VELIYAMKODE, MARANALLOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUNOD, S/O.SUNDARESAN, KOUSTHUBHAM, KAVUVILAKOM, ATHIYANNUR, ARALUMMOODU.P.O, ATHIYANNUR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. DEEPU, S/O.UPENDRANATHAN, THOTTATHIL VEEDU, CHENKALLUR, MARANALLOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. PRATHAPAN, S/O.THULASIDHARA PANICKER, RANDUKULATHINKARA MEKKEKKERA VEEDU, MAMBAZHAKKARA, PERUVAZHUTHUR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.MANU V. RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AT THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARANALLOOR POLICE STATION, MARANALLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.4858 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of August, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 454, 461 and 380 of IPC. According to prosecution, petitioners who are the divorced wife, son and close relatives of the first accused trespassed into the Ayurveda shop run by the defacto complainant and committed various offences and on a complaint made by the defacto complainant, a crime was registered under the above Sections. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that this is an absolutely false case. Defacto complainant had obtained an ex-parte divorce decree from the Family Court against the first petitioner, who is his wife. Thereafter, first accused came to know about the ex-parte decree and she filed a petition to set aside the ex-parte decree on 12.6.2008. She also came to know that after obtaining the ex-parte divorce decree, defacto complainant, who is aged 60 years, married a girl half of BA No.4858/08 2 his age and therefore, it is likely that the gift deed executed by him in favour of the second accused, who is the defacto complainant's son, will be cancelled. Therefore, second accused filed a suit before the Additional Munsiff and obtained an order of injunction against defacto complainant on 19.6.2008. On coming to know of all these developments, defacto complainant falsely filed this complaint, subsequently, on 22.6.2008 making an allegation that the incident happened on 6.6.2008. There is a long delay of 17 days in lodging the complaint and this itself will indicate that it is a subsequently fabricated false complaint. 4. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: Petitioners shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and if bail application is filed, they shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions: BA No.4858/08 3 (i) Petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when directed. (ii) Petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation. (iii) Petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl