Kerala High Court
Subeesh @ Abhi vs State Of Kerala on 28 September, 2017
Author: P.Ubaid
Bench: P.Ubaid
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017/6TH ASWINA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 4491 of 2017 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 573/2017 OF NARAKKAL POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
---------
PETITIONERS :
-----------
1. SUBEESH @ ABHI
S/O. STANLY JOSEPH, AGED 29 YEARS,
MANAKKAL HOUSE, KUDAGU, KARNATAKA STATE
2. SUMEENA JOSE,W/O. JOSEMON,
AGED 34 YEARS, MULLOOR HOUSE,
NAYARAMBALAM
3. MERCY, W/O. STANLY JOSEPH,
AGED 54 YEARS, MANAKKAL HOUSE,
KUDAGU, KARNATAKA STATE
4. STANLY JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH,
AGED 59 YEARS, MANAKKAL HOUSE,
KUDAGU, KARNATAKA STATE
BY ADV. SRI.K.V.BHASI
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT :
-----------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
NARAKKAL, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN 682 031
Bail Appl..No. 4491 of 2017 ()
-------------------------------
*ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED :
2. MARY FEMIN, AGED 24 YEARS,
D/O. JOHNY K.P., KOVATTIL HOUSE,
KADAVANTHARA POST, K.P.VALLON ROAD,
ERNAKULAM - 682020.
*ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
DT 19/7/2017 IN CRL.M.A.NO. 7787/2017.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AJITH MURALI
ADDL.R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.SIMOD SIVAN
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 28-09-2017, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
bp
P.UBAID, J.
~~~~~~~~~~
B.A No.4491 of 2017
~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 28th September, 2017
O R D E R
The petitioners herein seek pre arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest and custodial harassment in connection with Crime No.573 of 2017 of the Narakal Police Station registered under Sections 498A, 354C and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The de facto complainant in this case is the wife of the 1st petitioner. She was married by him on 24.10.2016, but the matrimony did not last long. Her complaint is that she had been mentally and physically ill- treated by her husband and the in-laws. The petitioners 3 and 4 are the parents-in-law, and the 2nd petitioner is the sister-in-law. The sister-in-law resides elsewhere. There is reason to believe that the parents-in-law are settled in Karnataka.
3. On a perusal of the complaint, I find that the de facto complainant's matrimony with the 1st petitioner stands strained. She is the additional 2nd respondent herein. B.A No.4491 of 2017 2 Though an attempt was made to resolve the dispute forever by mediation, the parties could not come to terms. There is reason to believe that the present complaint is the result of the strained matrimony. I do not find any definite allegation against the parents-in-law or the sister-in-law, except one two instances of simple assault in certain circumstances. What is required for a prosecution under Section 498A I.P.C is mental or physical harassment by a course of cruel conduct. The genuineness of the allegations of cruelty is a matter for decision on trial. In the particular circumstances, I find that interrogation of the petitioners in custody is not required. Even without such interrogation, the required materials can be collected. It will suffice that the petitioners are directed to report before the Investigating Officer for necessary interrogation.
In the result, this petition for pre arrest bail is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing bond with two solvent sureties for 40,000/- (Rupees Fourty thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer or the court below having jurisdiction, in B.A No.4491 of 2017 3 case of their arrest in connection with Crime No.573/2017 of the Narakal Police Station. Bail is granted on conditions that:
a. The petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer for necessary interrogation as and when required by him, and the 1st petitioner shall so report before the Investigating Officer on the first and the third Sunday of every English month for a period of three months.
b. The petitioners shall not in any manner influence or intimidate the witnesses and shall not have any contact with the material witnesses except for the purpose of settlement of the matrimonial dispute amicably, in case anybody intervened for such a course.
Sd/-
P.UBAID JUDGE //True copy// P.S. To Judge ma