IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 20TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 461 of 2009() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.444/08 OF PEROORKADA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------- UDAYAKUMAR, S/O.APPU, OONNANPARA PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE P.PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 461 of 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th February, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 498A, 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner (first accused) married the deceased, who is the daughter of de facto complainant, on 8.11.2006. She was harassed and illtreated by him and his relatives, demanding more dowry and on account of that, she committed suicide. She was abetted to commit suicide by all the accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the deceased had insisted that petitioner should take out a separate house, for which he was not amenable, since it was difficult for him to leave his old mother and join the deceased in a separate house. That is the only difference of opinion and on the date of suicide also, she made the same demand and she told petitioner that she would teach him a lesson. Petitioner is innocent of the allegations made and he may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. BA.461/09 2 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that de facto complainant's daughter was harassed by first accused and his relatives and she was forced to commit suicide. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that considering the nature of allegations made and the nature of investigation required, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Interrogation of petitioner would be required for ascertaining the facts which are within his exclusive knowledge. The suicide was on 20.11.2008 and petitioner is not made available for investigation so far. Hence, the following order is passed: (1) Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. (2) No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this Court. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.