IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1228 of 2010 CRIME NO.61 OF 2010 OF PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT. PETITIONER : ACCUSED NO.2: ------------------------------ M.LATHEESH KUMAR S/O.NARAYANAN, NEAR PALOTTUKAVU, AZHIKODE AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.AZHIKODE, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE ,STATION HOUSE OFFICER PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 1228 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of April, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the second accused in Crime No. 61 of 2010 of Payyannur Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the accused, originally, was under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, the offence was altered including the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The First Information Statement was given by the Manager of a lodge at Payyannur. He stated that on 20-1-2010, one Syam Kumar, a woman aged about 40 years and a girl child aged about 2 years came to the lodge and occupied a room. On 22-1-2010, the first informant found that the room was closed from outside. He opened the door. He found that the woman had committed suicide by hanging on the hook of the fan. Nobody else was seen in the B.A. NO. 1228 OF 2010 :: 2 :: room. He informed the police. The crime was registered for unnatural death. 4. The prosecution case is the following: The first accused Shammi Kumar married deceased Remya on 2-6-2002. Three children were born in that wedlock. The second accused is the brother and the third accused is the mother of the first accused. A few years after marriage, the accused persons started to mete out cruelty to Remya alleging that she had extra marital relationship. Remya was brutally manhandled by them. She was admitted in the hospital twice. On one occasion, Ramya attempted to commit suicide. On 19-10-2009, Remy filed a petition against the accused before the Circle Inspector, Womens cell. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were working abroad. On 16-1-2010, the father and mother of Remya along with the two children of Remya went to attend a wedding. The first accused was aware of this. When they returned home, Remya and her child were not seen in the house. After some time, the first accused contacted the father of Remya over phone and asked him whether Remya was available in the house. He made the call as if he was calling from abroad. Father of Remya handed over the phone to Satheesan, a neighbour. Satheesan B.A. NO. 1228 OF 2010 :: 3 :: stated to the first accused that he had seen the first accused taking Remya in a car on that day. Abruptly, the first accused disconnected the phone. On 20-1-2010, at midnight, the daughter of Remya was found in the Verandah of the house of Remya. It is alleged that the child was abandoned there by the first accused. On 21-1-2010, the first accused telephoned to the father of Remya and stated that Remya was available in the lodge at Payyannur. 5. Investigation revealed that the first accused took the room in the lodge giving a false name. The first accused left India immediately after the death of Remya. It is stated that he is in jail in Dubai. The investigating agency has arrived at the opinion that Remya was murdered by the first accused. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner/2nd accused stated that the second accused was working in Dubai . He came to India on 14-10-2009 after cancellation of Visa. In the Bail Application, it is stated that the second accused came to know about the death of Remya from newspapers. It is stated that he was not aware of the arrival of the first accused from Dubai. B.A. NO. 1228 OF 2010 :: 4 :: 7. The petitioner and the third accused filed an application for anticipatory bail before the Court of Sessions, Thalassery. That application was disposed of on 18th February 2010. Anticipatory bail was granted to the third accused. However, the prayer for anticipatory bail made by the petitioner (second accused) was rejected by the Sessions Court. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations levelled against the accused, I do not think that this is a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the investigation of the case. I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/