IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2008 / 27TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 264 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.12/08 OF PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION : PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4 -------------------------------------------- 1. SALIM, S/O.MASOOD RAWTHER, KULANGARA HOUSE, NALUKUNNU, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. NOORUDEEN, S/O.MASOOD RAWTHER, DO. DO. 3. JUMAID, S/O.SHAJAHAN, DO. DO. 4. SULTHAN BEEVI, W/O.MASOOD RAWTHER, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.264 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of January, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are the husband of the defacto complainant and his relatives. They are accused 1 to 4 in a crime registered alleging the offence punishable under Section 498 A r/w 34 I.P.C. 2. The marriage took place on 04.12.1997. The spouses are blessed with 2 children. Matrimonial cruelty of the culpable variety is alleged against the petitioners. The crime was registered on the basis of a complaint made by the defacto complainant to the police directly. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners prays, the learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail. The fact that the marriage had lasted a decade, the fact that 2 children were born, the fact that the learned Public Prosecutor submits that the victim has not suffered any external injuries consequent to the alleged physical assault as also the fact that B.A.No.264 of 2008 2 arrest and incarceration of the petitioners may close the doors of all possibilities of harmonious settlement of the matrimonial disputes do weigh with me in coming to this conclusion. Appropriate conditions can of course be imposed in the interests of a fair, efficient and expeditious investigation. 3. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. i) The petitioners shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11 a.m on 24.01.2008. They shall be enlarged on regular 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 learned Magistrate; ii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 3 p.m on 25.01.08 and 28.01.08 and thereafter between 10 a.m and 12 noon on all Mondays and Fridays for a period of 2 months. Subsequently the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so; iii) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall B.A.No.264 of 2008 3 thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law as if those directions were not issued at all; iv) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender on 24.01.2008 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be released from custody on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) each without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 24.01.2008. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-