IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1846 of 2011() ------------------------------------ OS.67/2011 of ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, NEYYATTINKARA CRIME NO.389/2011 OF PARASSALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 5 -------------------------------------------------------- 1. MURUGAN, S/O. BHASKARAN, AGED 39, ROADARIKATH VEEDU, RUSSEL PURAM.P.O.BALARAMAPURAM,NEYYATTINKARA. 2. BHASKARAN, AGED 72, FATHER OF MURUGAN, ROADARIKATH VEEDU, RUSSEL PURAM.P.O.BALARAMAPURAM,NEYYATTINKARA. 3. KRISHNA MMA, AGED 59, MOTHER OF MURUGAN, ROADARIKATH VEEDU, RUSSEL PURAM.P.O.BALARAMAPURAM,NEYYATTINKARA. 4. SARAVANAN, AGED 36, BROTHER OF MURUGAN, ROADARIKATH VEEDU, RUSSEL PURAM.P.O.BALARAMAPURAM,NEYYATTINKARA. 5. KASTHURI, AGED 29, SISTER OF MURUGAN, ROADARIKATH VEEDU, RUSSEL PURAM.P.O.BALARAMAPURAM,NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADVS. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. 2. DAYANANDAN, S/O. PAPPUKKUTTY PANICKER, DHANYA, PARASUVAIKAL, PARASUVAIKAL.P.O., PARASSALA, NEYYATTINKARA-695121. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss CRMC. NO.1846/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES A(A);- COPY OF THE ORDER IN WPC. 33331/2010 DT.D 3.11.2010. A(B):- COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DTD. 21.12.2010 ISSUED TO IST PETITIONER. A(C):- COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DTD. 2812.2010. A(D):- COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS. 67/2011 OF THE SUB COURT, NEYYATTINKARA DTD. 3.2.2011. A(E):- COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.389/2011 OF PARASSALA POLICE STATION DTD. 1.5.2011. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGEMENT tss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1846 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are accused 1 to 5 in Crime No.389 of 2011 of Parassala Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 304B, 403 and 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the IPC”). As per the FIR case is that first petitioner married the deceased, Dhanya and between 11.05.2006 and 07.08.2010 petitioners had been subjecting her to physical and mental cruelty demanding more ornaments and money, they insisted for sale of 25 cents at Pravachambalam, payment of Rupees five lakhs for the marriage of fifth petitioner and threatened that Dhanya will be divorced if she did not comply with those demands. She was unable to bear the physical and mental illtreatment. On 07.08.2010 while returning home with her father after writing a PSC test at Alappuzha in a KSRTC bus she collapsed and died. Thereafter there was some demands made by the mother of deceased to the petitioners as revealed from the copy of lawyer notice. On 01.05.2011 it is submitted that Crime No.389 of 2011 was registered by the Parassala Police against petitioners for the above offences. Learned counsel submitted that the allegations are wrong, no question of cruelty arose and much less offence under Section 304B of the IPC since deceased had a natural death. Learned counsel Crl.MC No.1846/2011 2 submits that in such circumstances registration of the case is an abuse of process of court and this Court should interfere under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. 2. Even as per the submission of learned counsel, the case was registered on 01.05.2011 and investigation is going on. Petitioners are already granted anticipatory bail by this Court by a separate order. Whether there were any physical or mental cruelty towards the deceased, death was unnatural as understood in Section 304B of the IPC and any of the offences alleged are made out are matters to be looked into by the Investigating Officer having regard to all relevant factors including the version of petitioners as well. In these circumstances it is not necessary for this Court to interfere in the matter at this stage. Without prejudice to other rights of petitioners as against final report if any that may be submitted, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is closed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks