IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 24TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5415 of 2008(B) ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 209/2008 OF POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION CC. NO.1065 OF 2008 ON THE FILE OF JFMC-II, KOTTARAKKARA PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3.: -------------------------------- 1. ALEX, S/O. THOMAS, KOCHUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, CHERUVAKKAL, ELAMADU VILLAGE. 2. SOSAMMA, W/O. THOMAS, KOCHUVILA PUTHEN - VEEDU, CHERUVAKKAL, ELAMADU VILLAGE. 3. VIMALA, D/O. SOSAMMA, KOCHUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, CHERUVAKKAL, ELAMADU VILLAGE NOW RESIDING AT CHRAKKADU PUTHEN VEEDU, VELLARAMKULAM, KARUKON P.O., ANCHAL. BY ADV. SRI.K.BABU (VETTAKALAYIL) SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENTS : ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION. 2. SIBI BABY, CHAMAVILA VEEDU, VELICHIKKALA, ADICHANALLOOR. BY SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.5415 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of September, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 498A and 34 I.P.C. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in the crime. They are the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the defacto complainant, who allegedly ill-treated the defacto complainant while she was living with her husband in the matrimonial house. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were shown as absconding accused in the charge sheet, though petitioners were available in the address. The police did not take any effort to enquire about the the petitioners or arrest them, in the course of investigation. The crime was registered on 07.05.2008 and within a short time, on 12.06.2008, in the next month itself, charge sheet was also laid, showing that the petitioners as absconding. The petitioners were actually not absconding, but they apprehend arrest and detention, since non-bailable warrants are issued against the B.A.5415/2008 2 petitioners, on accusation of having committed non bailable offence. 4. It is also contended that O.P.No.230 of 2008 was filed by the 1st petitioner seeking divorce against the defacto complainant before the Family Court on 01.04.2008, and after getting notice in the petition, the complaint is filed by the defacto complainant before the Magistrate court on 22.04.2008 which was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Settlement chances will be fissiled out, if petitioners are detained, it is submitted. As per the complaint itself, there was no physical assault on the defacto complainant, it is pointed out. After hearing both sides, I find that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners and the following order is passed: 1. The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 7 days from the date of this order and in case of their arrest, they will be produced before the Magistrate court concerned, in accordance with law. B.A.5415/2008 3 2. On production of the petitioners before the learned Magistrate and if any bail application is filed, the petitioners 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 condition that the petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac