IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4080 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CRIME NO. 231/2009 OF CHIRAYINKEEZH POLICE STATION, THIRUVANATHAPURAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- DIVAKARAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, CHINJU NIVAS, PADANILAM, CHIRAYINKEEZH. BY ADV. SRI. BLAZE K. JOSE RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHIRAYINKEEZH POLICE STATION. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 4080 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 27th day of July, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.231/2009 of Chirayinkeezh Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is as follows: The defacto complainant fell in love with the daughter of the accused. The accused and his family members opposed the relationship. The defacto complainant and Chinju, the daughter of the accused, started living together. The defacto complainant got a job at Ernakulam. On 6/07/2009 at 12.30 P.M, the defacto complainant went to the house of his friend. They wanted to go to the railway station. On their way, at 1.10 P.M, the accused came in a Qualis car, and hit the defacto complainant. He was knocked down and he came to hit on an electric post. The accused came out of the car and stated that he had gone there to kill the defacto complainant. B.A. No. 4080 /2009 Page numbers The defacto complainant ran away and went to a nearby house. The accused followed him and assaulted him with hands. The defacto complainant was taken to the hospital by his mother. 4. The case of the petitioner is that his daughter Chinju as well as the defacto complainant were minors at the time when his daughter was taken by the defacto complainant. His grievance is that even now, no valid marriage has taken place. According to the petitioner, the case is foisted against him. The petitioner has also a case that the defacto complainant demands huge amounts as a condition for marrying the daughter of the accused. 5. The Bail Application was vehementally opposed by the learned learned Public Prosecutor. 6. I have perused the Case Diary. No serious injuries were sustained by the defacto complainant. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, the injury sustained and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the B.A. No. 4080 /2009 Page numbers police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm