IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 17TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 654 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 27/08 OF KODAKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER --------------------------- SIMON, S/O. THOMAS, KUNNATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, IKKARAKUNNU P.O., EDAKULAM, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODAKARA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 654 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations of matrimonial cruelty punishable under Section 498A I.P.C. as also abetment to commit suicide punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. The marriage took place on 23.1.2005. The wife, along with an infant child aged about one year, killed herself by jumping before a running train on 14.1.2008. Crime was initially registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. In the course of investigation, allegations under Section 498A and 306 I.P.C. have been included. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner has not been arrested so far. He apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. He was not guilty of any matrimonial cruelty against his wife. In fact after delivery of the child the wife was passing through spells of depression. The commission of suicide with the child was evidently during one B.A.No. 654 of 2008 2 such spell of depression. It cannot be held that matrimonial cruelty had prompted her to commit suicide or that the petitioner had abetted her to commit suicide. The petitioner does not deserve to suffer the trauma of arrest and detention. He may be granted anticipatory bail, prays the learned counsel. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He points out that adequate materials have by now been collected to indicate that the petitioner has been behaving cruelly to his wife. He particularly relies on the materials which show that the petitioner had physically assaulted and inflicted burn injuries using an electric iron. Of course, there is no prompt complaint made before any authorities nor is any medical evidence available. But those, according to me, are not sufficient to militate against the gravity of the allegations raised against the petitioner. At this early stage of investigation I shall not embark on any detailed discussion on merit about the acceptability of the allegations raised or the credibility of the data collected. Suffice it to say that my attention has been drawn to the statements of the witnesses in the case diary, including the statement of the vicar of the local B.A.No. 654 of 2008 3 church. On an anxious consideration of all other relevant circumstances, I am unable to perceive any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This, I agree with the learned Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioner must be directed to appear before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm