IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5764 of 2011 CRMP.2091/2011 of DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD CRIME NO.297 OF 2011 OF SHORANUR POLICE STATION, PALAKKD. APPLICANT/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3 ------------------------------------------------ 1. PREMJYOTHI, AGED 53 YEARS, W/O.BALASUBRAMANIAN, SANTHIPURATH HOUSE, VEMBALATHUPADAM, KAILIYAD, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 2. SIBI, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.BALASUBRAMANIAN, SANTHIPURATH HOUSE, VEMBALATHUPADAM, KAILIYAD, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 3. DEVAKI, AGED 34 YEARS, W/O. RAJAN, SANTHIPURATH HOUSE, VEMBALATHUPADAM, KAILIYAD, OTTAPALAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE S.I. OF POLICE, SHORANUR POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 5764 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of July, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.297 of 2011 of Shoranur Police Station, Palakkad District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 498A, 323, 406 and 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Accused Nos.1 and 2 are the mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the victim. Accused No.3 is the servant in the house of accused No.1. The allegation is that the accused persons meted out cruelty to the victim and her life was made miserable by them. The victim was physically assaulted and there is even allegation that she was put to starvation. There was a case before the Family Court between the victim and her husband and that case was settled and the victim was brought to the matrimonial home again. It is alleged that due to the assault made by the accused persons, the victim sustained injuries. BAIL APPL. NO.5764 OF 2011 :: 2 :: 4. The medical examination of the victim would reveal that she sustained injuries on several parts of her body. The victim stated before the Medical Officer that she was assaulted by accused Nos.1 and 2. It is alleged that the assault and the cruelty were on account of the demand for more dowry. 5. The allegations are grave in nature. I have gone through the case diary. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The case diary shows the photograph of the victim taken at the time of her marriage in 2006 and the photograph taken after the crime was registered. The photographs would show, prima facie, that the allegations levelled against the accused are true. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the pathetic condition of the victim was brought to light by the anganwadi workers who visited the house for the purpose of census. They brought it to the notice of the authorities, which led to the registration of the crime. The investigation of the case is in progress. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that accused Nos.1 and 2 are not entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail at all. However, the case of BAIL APPL. NO.5764 OF 2011 :: 3 :: accused No.3, the servant in the house of accused Nos.1 and 2, is quite different. The victim did not allege before the Medical Officer that the servant (accused No.3) is also involved in the offence. By way of extreme indulgence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to accused No.3. Therefore, there will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the third petitioner/accused No.3, the officer in charge of the police station shall release her on bail on her executing bond for Rupees Ten thousand with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The third petitioner/third accused shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The third petitioner/third accused shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The third petitioner/third accused shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is dismissed in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 and it is allowed in the manner indicated above in so far as it relates to the third petitioner/accused No.3. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/