IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2898 of 2010() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.432/2010 REGISTERED BY MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION) PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4 ---------------------------------------------- 1. ABDUL KHADER,S/O.HYDROSE,AGED 55 YEARS, ELLIMPARAMBIL,NEDUMPARAMBU,WEST PERINJANAM. 2. KHADEJA,W/O.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 48 YEARS, ELLUMPARAMBIL,NEDUMPARAMBU,WEST PERINJANAM. 3. NOUFAL,S/O.ABDUL KHADER,AGED 21 YEARS, ELLUMPARAMBIL,NEDUMPARAMBU,WEST PERINJANAM. 4. NIYAS,S/O.ABDUL KHADER,AGED 19 YEARS, ELLUMPARAMBIL,NEDUMPARAMBU,WEST PERINJANAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,REPRESENTING THE S.I.OF POLICE,MATHILAKAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2010 ALONG WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.3568/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J ----------------------- B.A Nos.2898 AND 3568 OF 2010 -------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June 2010 ORDER This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Section 498 (A) r/w 34 IPC. According to prosecution, first accused married the de facto complainant's sister on 15/03/2009 and thereafter her husband and family members started harassing her by demanding more dowry and on 30/04/2010, the deceased poured kerosene and set fire to herself and she sustained burn injuries. She was admitted in hospital. Her brother gave a complaint to the police and FIR was registered against petitioners. Thereafter, the deceased died on 13/05/2010. 3. Learned counsel appearing for first accused argued first accused is absolutely innocent of the allegations made against him. Marriage was on 15/03/2009 and FIS itself will reveal that he left India after two months of marriage. He was not in India during the relevant period. But, on knowing that the deceased attempted to commit suicide on 30/04/2010, he immediately came back to India. There is no allegation in the FIS given by the deceased's brotherthat petitioner in any manner harassed the deceased. On the other hand, it is stated therein that he was treating the deceased affectionately and they were in cordial B.A Nos.2898 AND 3568 OF 2010 2 terms. Petitioner was arrested on 19/05/2010 and he is in custody for the past 22 days. 4. Learned Counsel for accused Nos. 2 to 5 submitted that they are the father-in-law, mother-in-law and brothers-in-law respectively of the deceased and they have not committed any offence. It is submitted that 4th and 5th accused are aged 19 and 21 years and they are the brothers of first accused. Absolutely no allegations were made against them that they harassed the deceased. They are students. There is no allegation that father- in-law and mother-in-law had harassed the deceased by demanding more dowry. But, the original allegation was that deceased set fire to herself since she was no allowed to go for the marriage of her cousin, as revealed by the FIS which is given by none other than the brother of the deceased, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as far as first accused is concerned, there is an averment in the FIS that the relationship between him and deceased was cordial. He was not available in India at the time of the incident on 30/04/2010. However, the allegations made against father-in-law and mother- in-law are serious in nature. The allegation of demand for more dowry is made in FIS itself. But, against third and fourth accused, there are no serious allegation except that fourth accused did not intervene when deceased was on fire. Fifth accused was not present when the incident happened. B.A Nos.2898 AND 3568 OF 2010 3 6. On hearing both sides and on going through the Case Diary, FIS and other records, I find that bail can be granted to first accused. However, as far as father-in-law and mother-in-law are concerned, there are serious allegations and taking into account the nature of allegations made, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them. Taking into account the limited role of the forth and fifth accused and absence of any allegation regarding harassment by them against deceased, I find, anticipatory bail can be granted to them. Hence, the following order is passed: (1) First accused shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned, on the following conditions: (i) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed and coperate with investigation . (ii) He shall not influence or intimidate any witness or tamper with any evidence. (2) Prayer for anticipatory bail by second and third accused is hereby rejected. B.A Nos.2898 AND 3568 OF 2010 4 (3) Fourth and fifth accused 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/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned, on condition that they shall co-operate with investigation and that they shall not influence or intimidate any witness or tamper with any evidence. Bail application number 3568/2010 is allowed. Bail application number 2898/2010 is partly allowed. K.HEMA JUDGE vdv