IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2008 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3583 of 2008() --------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.147/2008 OF PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION) PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ 1. M.V.VINOD, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.M.V.DEVAKI MANNIYAN VEEDU, PUTHUR, PO.ETTUKUDUKKA, KARIVELLUR 2. M.V.DEVAKI AGED 60 YEARS,W/O.RAMAN, MANNIYAN VEEDU, PUTHUR, P.O.ETTUKUDUKKA, KARIVELLUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM THROUGH PAYYANNUR POLICE. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. ----------------------------------- B.A. No. 3583 OF 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of June, 2008. O R D E R This is a petition for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioners are husband and mother-in-law of the de facto complainant. They allegedly harassed the de facto complainant after the marriage and hence a complaint was lodged before the police by the de facto complainant. A crime has been registered under Sections 498A and 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the de facto complainant's mother and grandmother are mentally sick and they had the habit of repeatedly filing complaint against the petitioners. The police was convinced about it and no action has been taken. First petitioner is a coolie and he has not assaulted the de facto complainant. On the same allegation made in the present crime, the de facto complainant had approached the police. But, on enquiry made and on being satisfied that there is no stuff in the allegations made, the police has not taken any action. Therefore, after about 7 to 8 days, she got herself B.A. No. 3583/08 2 admitted in a hospital though she had no injury and filed this complaint. Petitioners apprehend arrest. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor conceded that the de facto complainant did not have any external injury. The alleged date of assault is 29.02.2008, but the examination by the doctor is only on 07.03.2008. He submitted that the petitioners may be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation but he has no objection in releasing them on bail after the interrogation. Hence, the following order is passed. 1. Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 days from today and make themselves available for interrogation. 2. Thereafter, if the petitioners are arrested, they shall be produced before the Magistrate court concerned, in accordance with law. 3. On production of the accused before the Magistrate court, if any application for bail is moved, the petitioners shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties B.A. No. 3583/08 3 each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions: i) Petitioners shall not intimidate or threaten any witnesses and in case of breach of this order, bail is liable to be canceled. ii) Petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by him and co-operate with the investigation. This petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. smp