IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2011 / 30TH ASHADHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5189 of 2011() ----------------------------------------- CRIME NO.366/2011 OF THE POLICE STATION, THRIKODITHANAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT ----------------------------------- PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2 ---------------------------------------------- 1. BINU P.M., AGED 35, S/O.MAMMEN, PARAYATTU PADIJARETHIL HOUSE, KADAPRA VILLAGE, KADAPRA MURI, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. BEENA, W/O.YOHANNAN P.G., AGED 38, PARAYATTU PADIJARETHIL HOUSE, KADAPRA VILLAGE, KADAPRA MURI, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM SAMSON SMT.LOVELY SAMSON RESPONDENT(S): STATE ------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, THRIKODITHANAM, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A.No. 5189 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of July, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.366 of 2011 of Thrikodithanam Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The first accused is the husband of the de facto complainant. The second accused is the sister-in-law of the de facto complainant. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the second petitioner is a patient suffering from uterine tumour and she is under treatment. B.A.No. 5189 OF 2011 2 4. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 8th July, 2011, the following order was passed: “4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the first petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the first petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 14th and 15th July, 2011.” 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 8th July, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioners. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 8th July, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioners, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail B.A.No. 5189 OF 2011 3 on their executing bond for `10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. c) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. d) 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. cms