IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5816 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRLP..2619/2008 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM .................... (CRIME NO.355/2008 OF THE PARAVOOR POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1: ------------------------------------------------------ SWAMY SANGEETH, S/O.PONNAPPAN, CHARUVILA VEEDU, NEDUNGOLAM, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, PARAVOOR THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5816 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 498A and 323 read with Section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner married the defacto complainant and they have a child in the wedlock. At the time of marriage, 70 sovereigns of gold ornaments were given to the defacto complainant. The family property of defacto complainant was mortgaged, at the instance of petitioner, to raise Rs.4 lakhs for the marriage of the his sister. Even thereafter, defacto complainant was compelled to give more money and he harassed the defacto complainant. Apart from all these, petitioner is having illicit relationship with one lady and in such circumstances, defacto complainant was ousted from the house. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that there was only some small fight between the husband and the wife regarding breast feeding of the child and nothing more than that had happened. She refused to feed the child, when he hit her with his leg, and she left to her house. On the same day, her people came to the house and petitioner was brutally attacked. Petitioner is prepared to take back his wife and if anticipatory bail is refused, BA No.5816 /2008 2 family relationship will be totally strained, it is submitted. An attempt was made before the Lok Adalath for settling case and it did not work only because defacto complainant was adamant, it is contended. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor submitted that the allegations made against petitioner are serious in nature. The co-accused were granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court. But, in the light of specific allegations against petitioner, it is not proper to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the serious nature of allegations made, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The crime was registered as early as on 21.8.2008 and petitioner could not be interrogated so far. Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with investigation without any delay. Whether he surrenders or not, respondent is at liberty to arrest petitioner and proceed in accordance with law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl