Kerala High Court
Sreedevi vs State Of Kerala on 7 March, 2019
Author: Alexander Thomas
Bench: Alexander Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
THURSDAY ,THE 07TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 16TH PHALGUNA,
1940
Bail Appl..No. 557 of 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 118/2019 of DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 21-01-2019
CRIME NO.1458/2018 OF Munambom Police Station, Ernakulam
PETITIONER/S:
SREEDEVI, AGED 36 YEARS
D/O RAVI,PURAKKATTU(H),CHERAI KARA,
PALLIPURAM VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.M.VIVEK
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.
2 ADDL.R2 MAHESWARI
SOUGHT TO BE IMPLEADED
MAHESWARI, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O SUDHARMAN,
THATHAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR SREEKRISHNASWAMI
TEMPLE, MUNAMBAM, PALLIPPURAM, PALLIPORT,
ERNAKULAM-683515.
IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 27.2.19 IN
CRL.M.A NO.1/19 IN BA 557/2019.
BY ADV. SRI.K.I.SAGEER
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.SAIGY JACOB PALATTY- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
::2::
Bail Appl.No.557 of 2019
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
-----------------------------------
B.A.No.557 Of 2019
---------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of March, 2019.
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused No.1 in Crime No.1458/2018 of Munambam Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Sec.324 of I.P.C., and Secs.23 & 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
2. The brief of the prosecution case is that the petitioner while residing along with her two sons had brought accused No.2 to the house with whom she is having relationship and they went along with the children to a tourist place and the petitioner told her children to address the 2nd accused as father which was turned down by the elder son whereby the petitioner had thrown a knife on him and poured hot tea on her elder son and beat the younger son using a belt in front of the elder son, etc. It is further alleged that the younger son had told the elder that the 2 nd accused had once pressed a pillow on his face and thereby committed the offences.
3. The petitioner would contend that these allegations are falsely raised only after the petitioner has filed a Guardian O.P before the Family Court for getting custody of the children and the ::3::
Bail Appl.No.557 of 2019
petitioner has filed a divorce petition and a petition for permanent custody of the children, etc.
4. It is now pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the counsel for the 2 nd respondent that the Family Court has now passed orders denying custody of the children to the petitioner and which was granted to the father of the children and the petitioner has been granted only limited visitation rights as per the orders of the Family Court, etc.
5. Taking into account the various aspects of the matter, more particularly, the allegations raised by the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner will have to fully co- operate with the Investigating Officer for interrogation for effectuating a fair and fruitful investigation. Hence, this Court is of the view that instead of straight away granting bail to the petitioner, in the interest of both sides, the following orders are passed:
(i) The petitioner will surrender before the Investigating Officer in respect of the abovesaid Crime at 10:00 a.m. on 23.3.2019 to subject herself for interrogation.
(ii) The Investigating Officer will conduct the interrogation on the same day. If the interrogation process is not completed on the same day, the Investigating Officer will be at liberty to direct the petitioner to appear before him for further interrogation on the next day or any day fixed by him, which the petitioner has to comply with.
::4::
Bail Appl.No.557 of 2019
(iii) After completing the above interrogation process, in case the Investigating Officer records the arrest of the petitioner, then she shall be released on bail on her executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Fourty Thousand only) and on furnishing two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer concerned. Further it is also ordered that it will be subject to following conditions:-
(a) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal offences of similar nature.
(b) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation.
(c) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required in that connection.
(d) The petitioner shall not influence witness or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner, whatsoever.
(iv) If the petitioner does not comply with the directions issued by this Court to subject to the interrogation process, then the benefit of the directions issued by this Court will automatically stand vacated without any further orders of this Court.
(v) The access of the petitioner to the children would be fully regulated by the conditions and orders that may be rendered by the Family Court, which the petitioner shall faithfully adhered to.
If the petitioner violates all or any of the bail conditions, then the jurisdictional court concerned will stand hereby authorised, to consider the plea for cancellation of bail, if required, in accordance with law.
With these observations and directions, the Bail Application stands disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge.
Bkn/-
::5::
Bail Appl.No.557 of 2019
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ANX-A: PETITION IN G.O.P.NO.734/2018 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.
ANX-B: LETTER DTD. 4.1.2019 RECEIVED FROM THE INFANT JESUS PUBLIC SCHOOL, NORTH PARAVUR.
ANX-C: ORDER DTD. 21.1.2019 IN CRL.M.C.NO.118/2019 OF SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM.