Kerala High Court
K.V. Thimothy vs State Of Kerala on 12 December, 2017
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY,THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/21ST AGRAHAYANA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 8393 of 2017 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 1295/2017 OF NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
----------------------
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :
----------------------------------------
1. K.V. THIMOTHY, AGED 75 YEARS,
KALATHOTTUKARAN HOUSE, ATHANI,
MINALOOR P.O., THRISSUR, PIN - 680 581.
2. ANNIE THIMOTHY, AGED 68 YEARS, W/O. K.V.THIMOTHY,
KALATHOTTUKARAN HOUSE, ATHANI, MINALOOR P.O.,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680 581.
3. LINTON. K.T., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.K.V. THIMOTHY,
KALATHOTTUKARAN HOUSE, ATHANI, MINALOOR P.O.,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680 581.
4. LINTY JOSHI, AGED 40 YEARS, W/O. JOSHY K.JOHN,
KOOTHUR HOUSE, INDIRA NAGAR FIRST, REHMATH QUARTERS,
KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 501.
5. JOSHY K.JOHN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. K.V. JOHNY,
KOOTHUR HOUSE, INDIRA NAGAR FIRST, REHMATH QUARTERS,
KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 501.
BY ADVS.DR.SEBASTIAN CHAMPAPPILLY
DR.ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA
SRI.GEORGE CLEETUS
SRI.P.A.SAINUDEEN
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT :
--------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION, NJARAKKAL,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
B.A. No. 8393 of 2017
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 12th day of December, 2017
ORDER
1.This application for pre-arrest bail is preferred by accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.1295/2017 of Njarakkal Police Station. The aforesaid crime was registered on the basis of information given by one Antony M.A., who happens to be the son-in-law of first and second petitioners. Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are the son and daughter respectively of the first and second petitioners. The 5th petitioner is not arrayed as an accused in the crime.
2.The prosecution allegation is that the petitioners herein have received a sum of Rs.15 lakhs from the de facto complainant and thereafter failed to return the amount.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegations are absolutely false. It is submitted that the de facto complainant married Venty Timothy, the daughter of first and second petitioners in the year 2013 and they went abroad. A son was born in the wedlock. Later, Venty Timothy, was BA..8393/17 -:2:- diagnosed with lung cancer and she was admitted to Lakeshore Hospital at Nettur. The de facto complainant without any remorse or compassion ditched his wife and she was left to the care of her parents and brother. Later, at the instance of Venty Timothy, Crime No.440 of 2016 was registered against the de facto complainant alleging offences punishable under Sections 376, 465 and 193 of the Indian Penal Code. Venty Timothy has also preferred a complaint invoking the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and other proceedings were initiated before the Family Court. According to the learned counsel, it is as a counterblast that the present complaint was submitted based on which a frivolous and vexations crime was registered.
4.I have heard the learned public prosecutor and have gone through the case diary.
5.The case diary reveals that there is substantial merit in the contentions advanced by the learned counsel. It does not appear to me that this is a case wherein custodial interrogation of the petitioners is called for .
BA..8393/17 -:3:- In the result, this bail application will stand allowed, subject to the following conditions:
i) It is directed that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners herein in connection with Crime No.1295 of 2017 of Njarakkal Police Station, they shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer effecting the arrest.
ii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required.
Sd/-
Raja Vijayaraghavan V., Judge krj.12/12 //True Copy// P.A. To Judge