HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
VARGHESE CHERIAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./9416/2022
Bail - Pre-arrest Bail - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 438; Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 498A, 341, 323, 294(b), 506; Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Section 31 - The court acknowledged the gravity of the allegations but determined that custodial interrogation was unnecessary, granting pre-arrest bail under specified conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners are accused in a case involving allegations of harassment under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code and a violation of a domestic violence protection order.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to pre-arrest bail given the serious nature of the allegations against them.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided that the severity of the accusations did not warrant custodial interrogation, allowing pre-arrest bail with conditions.
Final Decision: Application for pre-arrest bail allowed with specific conditions.
ORDER
This is an application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 .
2. Petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.485/2022 of Venmani Police Station, Alappuzha District. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 498A , 341, 323, 294(b), and 506 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 .
3. It was submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that during the course of investigation, offence under Section 498A was deleted and Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was incorporated.
4. According to the prosecution, petitioners, who are the in laws of the defacto complainant, along with the 1st accused physically and mentally harassed her, and failed to abide by an order of protection issued by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur. 5. Smt.Anjana, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the entire prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was also submitted that petitioners are being victimised due to a matrimonial dispute between the defacto complainant and her husband and that petitioners, who are brother in law and his wife are both being unnecessarily proceeded against. 6. Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is essential.
7. On a consideration of the circumstances arising in the case, though I am of the view that the allegations are serious in nature, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. In view of the above, the petitioners are entitled to be released on pre arrest bail.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:
a) Petitioners shall be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if they are arrested by the police in connection with this case.
(b) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation if they are so required in writing and shall co- operate with the investigation.
(c) Petitioners shall not destroy or tamper with the evidence or intimidate or threaten or contact the defacto complainant or her family members.
(d) Petitioners shall not commit any other similar offences while they are on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jm/
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9416/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 485/2022 OF VENMANI POLICE STATION
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.