IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2008 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7442 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.698/2008 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION) PETITIONERS/2ND AND 4TH ACCUSED: -------------------- 1. ANEESA, D/O.ASSAINAR, AKBAR VILLA, BALLA BEACH, KANHANGAD, KASARGOD. 2. SHAMSEER, AGED 18 YEARS, SON OF MOIDU, VADAKAR MUKKU, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENT(S): STATE: --------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S.BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl.No. 7442 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of December, 2008. ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 498(A) of IPC. According to prosecution, de facto complainant married first accused on 16.12.2007. Second accused is first accused's daughter born in his former marriage. A3 is the second accused's husband. A4 is the maternal first cousin of second accused. They allegedly harassed the de facto complainant, physically and mentally, by demanding more dowry, 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that first accused and de facto complainant were married on 16.12.2007 and he went abroad in the same month. Thereafter, he came back in May 2008 and was in India and he left abroad in July 2008. He divorced the de facto complainant in October, 2008. Thereafter, a complaint was filed before the Police on 15.11.2008 making false allegations. It is submitted that it is only because the marital relationship between first accused and de facto complainant ended up in divorce that this complaint is falsely lodged. Petitioners are not even residing with de facto complainant and they reside in different places. Learned counsel for petitioners also submitted that 2nd accused is having two children, aged 11 years and 3 months respectively and her [B.A.No.7442/08] 2 husband is working abroad, who is the 3rd accused in this case. A4 is only aged 18 years. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that only general allegations are made against second and fourth petitioners that they are harassing de facto complainant. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioners and the following order is passed: Petitioners shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and they shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions: i) Petitioners shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed and co-operate with the investigation. ii) Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate any witness or commit any offence while on bail. Petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.