IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2008 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3618 of 2008() ----------------------------- PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2,3 & 4 -------------------------------------------- 1. PATHUMMA, W/O.KUNNATH KUNHEEDU, AGED 75, THUTHA, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. MOHAMMEDKUTTY @ MANI, AGED 45, S/O.KUNNATHU KUNJEETH, DO. DO. 3. ALEEMA, AGED 40 YEARS, D/O.KUNNATH KUNJEETH, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT/STATE ------------------------------ 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, COCHIN-682 031. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 3618 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of June, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. 2. The crime has been registered under sections 498A, 106, 323, 324 read with section 34 IPC on the basis of a private complaint filed by the 1st accused's wife, which was forwarded to the police under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. 3. Petitioners are accused 2 to 4, being the mother, brother and sister of the 1st accused. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners have not committed any offence and no specific allegations are made against them. Entire allegations are made against the 1st accused. It is also submitted that the 1st accused had lodged a complaint before the Sub Inspector of Police alleging certain offences committed by the defacto- complainant, her father and brother and Annexure-A dated 15-5-2008 is copy of the said complaint. Thereafter, a registered notice was also caused to be sent to her on 17-5-2008 and copy is Annexure-III. It is only a counter blast to the action taken by the 1st accused that the private complaint was filed subsequently by the defacto-complainant, it is submitted. It is also pointed out that the 1st accused was arrested and he was granted bail. BA 3618/08 -2- 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the charge has already been laid and the name of the 2nd accused is deleted from the array of the accused. She is the 1st petitioner herein. The above submission is recorded. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that suitable directions can be issued in this case and the following order is passed:- 1) Prayer for anticipatory bail of the 1st petitioner is rejected, since she is not an accused as per the submission of the the learned Public Prosecutor . 2) Petitioners 2 and 3 shall be released on bail, in the event of their arrest, on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-each with solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that they shall make themselves available for interrogation and they shall co-operate with the investigation and also they will not influence or intimidate any witness while on bail. The application is disposed of as above. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.