IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6068 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 509/2008 OF KOTTAYAM EAST POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED:- ------------------------------ GIKKU GEORGE IDICULLA, S/O.VARGHESE, MULAMOOTTIL HOUSE, SILVER JUBILEE NAGAR, VADAVATHOOR.P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC SRI.V.HARI KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM EAST POLICE STATION (CRIME NO.509/2008),THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6068 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under section 498A IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner and de facto complainant were married in August, 2007 and after the marriage, petitioner started harassing de facto complainant by demanding her to withdraw Rs.10 lakhs which is in Fixed Deposit in her name. He also physically and mentally harassed her. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner and de facto complainant were in love with each other from VII th Standard onwards and the marriage was not liking of their family members. Therefore, because of their intervention there were some problems in the marital relationship and that ended up in filing of a divorce petition by the wife on 8-8-2008. After one month, petitioner filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, with intention to get back his wife and child. A petition under the Guardian and Wards Act was also filed by petitioner for the custody of minor child. 4. Petitioner was working abroad and his wife was working as a Software Engineer in Hydrabad. Petitioner come back India BA 6068/08 -2- and was living with de facto complainant in Hydrabad. He was without employment some time and hence quarrels occurred but now he has obtained employment. It is submitted that petitioner is interested in his wife and child and he is prepared to deposit some substantial amount for the maintenance of the child. The matter is being settled at the Family Court and the three petitions are posted for counselling before the Family Court. In the mean time, if petitioner is arrested, chance for settlement will be fizzled out, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail on conditions. 6. On hearing both sides, I am also satisfied that some conditions can be imposed and subject to that, petitioner can be granted bail, in the interest of both sides. 7. Hence, the following order is passed:- (1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate court concerned within two weeks from today and he shall be released on bail, on his executing a bond for Rs. 25,000/- with two solvent sureties each, for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, on the following conditions:- BA 6068/08 -3- i) Petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when directed. ii) Petitioner shall surrender the passport within seven days of his release before the Magistrate Court. iii) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence any witness or commit any offence while on bail iv) Petitioner shall produce a Fixed Deposit receipt for an amount of Rs.1 lakh in the name of his child before the Magistrate Court within two weeks from today. This petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.