IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2011 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1326 of 2011() ------------------------------------ CMP.123/2011 of ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- PRASEEDA. S, D/O.N. SATHEESH BABU, AGED 24, HOUSE NO.R7, JAI NAGAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. RIJU RAJ, S/O.K. RAJENDRAN, AISWARYA, PULLUVILAKOM, PVRA 26, T.B. JUNCTION, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 101. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 011. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN. R2 & R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.MANU. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1326 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of May, 2011. ORDER There are several litigations, civil and criminal between the warring wife and husband, petitioner and first respondent before me. One is Crime No.490 of 2009 of Medical College Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under Sections 324, 354 and 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Police submitted final report against the first respondent and others. First respondent was granted anticipatory bail on 11.08.2009 as per Annexure-A4, order with a direction to seek regular bail within three weeks and surrender his passport on the date of granting bail. First respondent did not comply with the said direction. The second respondent (Investigating Officer) moved the Sessions Court which as per Annexure-A5, order dated 20.11.2009 cancelled Annexure-A4, order. Thereon first respondent moved B.A.No.1934 of 2010 for anticipatory bail in this Court. Pending that petition first respondent filed Cr.M.C.No.1343 of 2010 to enlarge time to surrender before court without insisting to surrender the passport. By Annexure-A6, order this Court disposed of Crl.M.C.No.1343 of 2010 on 23.04.2010 directing the first respondent to surrender before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram on 30.06.2010. By Annexure-A6, order the first respondent was granted bail. Petitioner filed Crl.M.C.No.1762 of 2010 to cancell that bail. By Annexure-A8, order the bail was cancelled. First respondent Crl.MC No.1326/2011 2 challenged that order before the Supreme Court by way of a Special Leave Petition but, that was dismissed. Thereafter first respondent filed B.A. No.8771 of 2010 in this Court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “the Code”). This Court passed Annexure-A10, order dated 05.01.2011 directing the first respondent to surrender before the Investigating Officer. Learned Magistrate was directed to consider the bail application on the date of appearance of the first respondent. First respondent preferred C.M.P.No.123 of 2011 before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate who passed Annexure- A11, order dated 18.01.2011 granting bail to the first respondent. That order is under challenge. Learned counsel for petitioner – wife submitted that without imposing any condition learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has granted bail to the first respondent. It is also submitted that there are other proceedings between parties including an application for awarding maintenance under Section 125 of the Code pending against first respondent. It is the apprehension of petitioner that the first respondent may go abroad at any time and defeat the proceedings against him. Crl.MC No.1326/2011 3 2. Learned counsel for the first respondent submits that first respondent is working as an IT Manager of a Daily at Sharja and that presently he is abroad. Learned counsel undertakes that first respondent will appear before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in connection with the case as and when his presence is necessary and as the learned Additional Chief Judge directs. That undertaking would allay the apprehension of the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances stated I find no reason to set aside Annexure-11, order. Resultantly this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed recording the undertaking made on behalf of the first respondent that he will appear before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram (in Crime No.490 of 2009 of Medical College Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram) as and when his presence is required and as may be directed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks