IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2008 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1382 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.10/07 OF KATTOOR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: APPLICANT -------------------------- RAJAN, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.SUKUMARAN THARAYAPURATH HOUSE, CHAKKARAPPADAM PERINJANNUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.M.B.PRAJITH RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING THE C.I. OF POLICE STATION, KATTOOR. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 1382 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Secs.498A, 307 and 302 of the IPC. The petitioner is the 3rd accused. A woman committed suicide. Her husband as well as his relatives are arrayed as accused. The petitioner is the uncle of the husband of the deceased. There is a dispute as to whether the woman had attempted to commit suicide or whether attempt was made by her mother-in-law to cause her death. She suffered burn injuries. Investigation is in progress. The marriage between the spouses had taken place on 20/8/03. The deceased suffered burn injuries on 19/1/07. Investigation is in progress. Some of the co-accused have already been arrested. The petitioner apprehends imminent B.A. No. 1382 of 2008 -: 2 :- arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. Even if all the allegations were accepted, he cannot have any liability for the offence alleged under Secs.307 and 302 of the IPC. The learned counsel submits that the allegations under Sec.498A of the IPC are also not justified at all. 3. There was an estrangement between spouses. There was a talk of settlement. The deceased was brought to the house of her husband and left there. After she came back to the house, there were some instances. There was an allegation that she had slapped her mother-in-law. This allegation had brought all the relatives of the husband to the house. The mother-in-law was allegedly taken to the Doctor. The relatives of the husband of the deceased, including the petitioner, are alleged to have made false allegations and vexed and harassed the deceased. The first version is that unable to stand the insult and trauma, she rushed to the kitchen and set herself ablaze. Later, when the deceased was in the hospital, an allegation was raised that her mother-in-law had poured the kerosene over her and had set her ablaze. Be that as it may, there is no specific allegation of the offences punishable under Secs.307 and 302 of the IPC B.A. No. 1382 of 2008 -: 3 :- against the petitioner. The petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 4. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. After discussions at the Bar, the learned Public Prosecutor does not further moment press the allegations under Secs.307 and 302 of the IPC against the petitioner. But the learned Public Prosecutor submits that there are satisfactory indications to infer culpability under Sec.498A of the IPC against the petitioner herein also. The petitioner does not, in these circumstances, deserve to be granted anticipatory bail. The learned Sessions Judge had accepted the contentions of the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner had made attempts to mislead the investigation. 5. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am satisfied that there are no features in this case which can persuade this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner for the allegation under Sec.498A of the IPC. He must surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and then seek regular bail for the said offence. However, I am satisfied that it can be clarified that when such application for regular bail is considered by the learned Magistrate, he must eschew and ignore the allegations raised under Secs.307 and B.A. No. 1382 of 2008 -: 4 :- 302 of the IPC. 6. This bail application is, in these circumstances, allowed in part. The prayer for anticipatory bail for the offence under Sec.498A of the IPC is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. It is, however, made clear that when such bail application is considered, the learned Magistrate shall eschew and ignore the allegations under Secs.307 and 302 of the IPC and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, on merits and expeditiously. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge