IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2009 / 29TH POUSHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 198 of 2009() -------------------------------------- CRIME NO.288/08 OF SANTHANPARA POLICE STATION ........... PETITIONER (S) / ACCUSED ------------------------ MAHESH, S/O SANKARAN,CHENNAKOTU VEEDU, VATTAPARA KARA, KANTHIPARA VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): STATE ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,SANTHANPARA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DIST. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------- B.A. No.198 OF 2009 ---------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 174 Cr.P.C. According to prosecution, one Soumya who is the niece of the defacto complainant committed suicide, between 29.11.2008 and 30.11.2008, by hanging. A crime was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. under the caption 'unnatural death'. On investigation, it is revealed that the said deceased was harassed by petitioner and he abetted suicide. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner and Soumya were classmates upto 10th standard. Thereafter, they studied in different classes for plus two course. After completing the plus two course, petitioner went to Ernakulam, to pursue his further studies and Soumya continued her studies in a college in her native place. On a particular day, on 29.11.2008, petitioner and Soumya were found talking to each other by her uncle and she ran away from the place stating that she will not go to her house (This is B.A.No.198 of 2009 2 the prosecution case itself). Actually she was right through continuing the relationship with petitioner as a friend but, the said relationship was hidden from her family members, since they were against such relationship. Since her uncle happened to see petitioner and the deceased talking, she immediately ran away and she committed suicide since she had hidden the relationship from the family members. Petitioner is not responsible, it is submitted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that he may be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer and co- operate with the investigation. It is also pointed out that as per the case diary statements, petitioner and deceased appear to have very close intimacy with each other, which was hidden from the knowledge of the relatives of the deceased. But, on the date of occurrence, her uncle happened to see her with petitioner. On hearing both sides and on going through the case diary at length, I am satisfied that if anticipatory bail is refused to petitioner, it is likely that he will suffer irreparable injury and loss. B.A.No.198 of 2009 3 Hence, the following order is passed. Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation and in case, petitioner is arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer on the following conditions : i) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed and co-operate with the investigation. ii) Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate any witness or commit any offence while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac