Kerala High Court
Nazarkhan vs Deputy Superintendent Of Police
Author: Alexander Thomas
Bench: Alexander Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/2ND KARTHIKA, 1936
Bail Appl..No. 7560 of 2014 ()
-------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 4326/2014 of J.M.F.C.-II,ATTINGAL DATED
CRIME NO. 482/2011 OF PALLICKAL POLICE STATION ,
THIRUVANANDAPURAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:-:
---------------------
NAZARKHAN, AGED 56 YEARS
S/O.KABEERKHAN, MANGULAM HOUSE, PALLIKKAL P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINT & STATE:-:
---------------------------------------------
1. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
CRIME DETACHMENT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL - 695 027.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PALLIKKAL POLICE STATION, ATTINGAL
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 022.
3. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
.....................................................
Bail Application No. 7560 of 2014
.........................................................
Dated this the 24th day of October, 2014
ORDER
Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No. 428 of 2011 of Pallikkal Police Station, Attingal for an offence registered under Section 498 A of IPC.
2. The gist of the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner's wife committed suicide on 30-07-2011, that this was caused by the mental and physical harassment inflicted on the deceased by the petitioner, which resulted in her suicide, and that the petitioner has thus committed the aforementioned offence under Sec. 498 A of IPC.
3. Sri. P.V. Kunhikrishnan, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's marriage was about 27 Bail Application No. 7560 of 2014 2 years back and the couple had one son and two daughters in the wedlock. They are grown-up now and they are residing in Sharja for more than 27 years. The petitioner was no way involved in the aforementioned allegations. After the funeral of the deceased, complaints were given by the brother of the deceased and the local police investigated the case and found that there is nothing suspicious in her death. Later, at the repeated request of the brother of the deceased, the case was transferred for further investigation by the Crime Branch (CBCID) who also found that there is nothing suspicious against the petitioner. Still further, the brother of the deceased approached this Court by filing Writ Petition for further investigation, resulting which the case was again transferred to the first respondent, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Detachment, Thiruvananthapuram. Now, it is being alleged for the first time that the petitioner was involved in the aforementioned allegations Bail Application No. 7560 of 2014 3 etc. and that the petitioner was arrested on the night of 7-10- 2014 and was produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate on 8-10-2014 and was remanded on that day itself and has been in judicial custody since then for the last 17 days.
4. Sri.P.V. Kunhikrishnan, the learned counsel for the petitioner strongly urged that the petitioner is absolutely innocent of all the allegations in the above case. It is further submitted that investigation is almost completed and there is no relevant ground justifying the continued detention of the petitioner any further and it is accordingly prayed that the petitioner may be granted bail subject to stringent conditions protecting the bonafide interest of the prosecution.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the first respondent/Crime Detachment had later conducted further investigation of the case which disclosed the commission of the above offence by the petitioner and that he is arrested as stated Bail Application No. 7560 of 2014 4 above and was remanded on 8-10-2014. The Public Prosecutor would also submit that the investigation is almost over. It is also submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that in case this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner, the same may be conditioned with necessary safeguards to protect the bonafide interest of the prosecution and to enable the fair and smooth investigation of the case.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and on an evaluation of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant the benefit of regular bail to the petitioner in this case, but restricted with necessary conditions so as to protect the bonafide interest of the prosecution.
7. In this view of the matter, it is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each Bail Application No. 7560 of 2014 5 for the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned and subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court concerned at the time of executing the bail bond and if he is not a passport holder, then he will file an affidavit to that effect in the said court. If the petitioner requires his passport for travel abroad, he is at liberty to approach the local court concerned for the release of the same and for necessary permission in that regard. In case such an application is filed, the court concerned is at liberty to consider the same on merits and pass appropriate orders thereon, taking sufficient guidance from the principles laid down by this Court in the case Asok Kumar v. State of Kerala reported in 2009(2) KLT 712, notwithstanding the above said conditions imposed by this Court.
ii. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required..
iii. The petitioner shall not interfere with the investigation in any manner.
iv. The petitioner shall not influence the witnesses or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper the evidence in any manner whatsoever.
v. The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Bail Application No. 7560 of 2014 6 investigation.
If the petitioner violates any of the conditions as ordered above, then the bail granted to him is liable to be cancelled.
In terms of the above said directions, this Bail Application stands finally disposed of.
Dated this the 24th day of October, 2014.
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE ani/