IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 2043 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.44/08 OF VATTAPARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED --------------------------------------- PRASANTH,S/O.CHANDRASEKHARAN, CHARUVILAKATHU VEEDU, KANAKKODU, VATTAPARA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A RESPONDENTS: STATE ------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No.2043 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.498A of the IPC. The marriage between the spouses took place on 23/2/06. They are blessed with one child. The crime was registered on the complaint of the wife/ the de facto complainant. Theirs was a love marriage. From the date of marriage, the husband and the mother-in-law, it is alleged, were tormenting the de facto complainant with complaints that she had not brought sufficient dowry. Strain in the relationship continued, notwithstanding the passage of time and the birth of the child. It is alleged that on 16/2/08 the husband and the mother-in-law had physically assaulted the de facto complainant. Her brother, who reached the scene of the B.A. No.2043 of 2008 -: 2 :- crime on coming to know of the incident and who tried to intervene, was also assaulted. Injuries were suffered by both. The brother-in-law alleged that the petitioner had attacked him with stone; whereas the wife alleged that she was hit with a mobile phone by her husband and beaten with a stick by her mother-in-law. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. Strain in the matrimony is prompting the de facto complainant and her brother to raise false and vexatious allegations against the petitioner. The petitioner does not deserve to endure the trauma of arrest and detention. The petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor controverts the contentions raised. He points out that injuries have been suffered by both the victims. However, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. I reckon that stand to be reasonable. Arrest and incarceration of the petitioner is likely to mar the matrimonial tie beyond repair. I do further note that the injuries allegedly suffered by the wife are simple and B.A. No.2043 of 2008 -: 3 :- insignificant. Appropriate conditions can, of course, be imposed. Anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. 4. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 11/4/08. He shall be released on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 12/4/08 and 13/4/08. During this period the Investigator shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps for the proper conduct of the investigation. Thereafter the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of two months. Subsequently, he shall so make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. (iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall B.A. No.2043 of 2008 -: 4 :- thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if these directions were not issued at all. (iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 11/4/08 as directed in clause (i) above, he shall be released on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 11/4/08. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge