Muneer v. State of Kerala

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1946 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO. 5626 OF 2024`** ``` CRIME NO.475/2024 OF KUTHUPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` MUNEER, AGED 44 YEARS S/O. MOIDU.K.V, 'DARUL HUDA HOUSE, MOWVERY, KOTTAYAM MALABAR.P.O, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR., PIN - 670643 ``` ``` BY ADVS. D.ARUN BOSE K.VISWAN P.S.POOJA ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` ``` BY ADV SMT. NEEMA T. V. - SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` 2 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024 ``` ## **O R D E R** ## **Dated this the 1[st] day of August, 2024** The application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short, ‘BNSS’), for an order of pre-arrest bail. 2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.475/2024 of the Kuthuparamba Police Station, Kannur, which is registered against him for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 324 and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The essence of the prosecution case is that: the accused was married to the defacto complainant on 30.07.2006. The couple has four children born in the wedlock. The accused is, constantly, mentally and physically harassing the defacto complainant. On 26.05.2024, at around 18.30 hours, the accused ``` 3 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024 ``` assaulted the defacto complainant with his hands and firewood and caused hurt to her. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences. 4. Heard; Sri. Arun Bose D. ABD, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Neema T. V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations leveled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioner and the defacto complainant are married for nearly 18 years, and have four children in their wedlock. It is only to see that the petitioner is arrested, the defacto complainant had filed the present frivolous complaint. Their marital relationship is strained. In fact, on earlier occasions also the defacto complainant had left the matrimonial home. Subsequently, a rapprochement was effected and they ``` 4 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024`** resumed cohabitation. Now, the present complaint is filed. The petitioner is a law abiding citizen and the sole breadwinner of his family. The petitioner’s custodial interrogation is not necessary and no recovery is to be effected. Hence, the application may be allowed. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She submitted that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents, since he is involved in four other crimes of the very same Police Station. If the petitioner is granted an order of pre-arrest bail, he would intimidate the victim and witnesses, and tamper with the evidence. Hence, the application may be dismissed. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner refuted to the submissions of the learned Public Prosecutor and stated that the subject matter of the dispute in three ``` 5 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024 ``` crimes has been settled out of the Court. In respect of the one crime, the trial is going on. The petitioner is not an habitual offender as alleged by the prosecution. 8. On an appreciation of the materials on record, it can be gathered that the petitioner was married to the defacto complainant as early as on 30.07.2006 and they have four children born in the wedlock. This is after nearly 18 years of the marriage, that the present crime has been registered on the ground that the petitioner has mentally and physically harassed the defacto complainant, and hit her with a firewood and caused simple hurt to her. Whether or not, the offence under Section 498A of the IPC would be attracted is a matter to be investigated and ultimately decided at the time of the trial. 9. In **Bhadres Bipinbhai Sheth v. State of Gujarat and another** [2015 KHC 4579] the Hon'ble ``` 6 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024 ``` Supreme Court has succinctly culled out the principles to grant orders of pre-arrest bail. It is laid down that Courts should be careful and meticulous in evaluating the facts of each case, especially in family disputes, before granting an order of pre-arrest bail. The court should consider whether arresting of an accused would lead to ignominy, humiliation and disgrace to the accused and their family and also if there is any frivolity in the complaint registered against the accused. 10. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar and the materials placed on record, and on comprehending the fact that the marital relationship between the petitioner and the defacto complainant is strained, that the defacto complainant had not made any allegation against the petitioner for the last 18 years and they have four children born in the wedlock and further that ``` 7 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024 ``` the allegation is, the petitioner had hit her with a firewood and she suffered simple hurt, I am of the firm view that the petitioner’s custodial interrogation is not necessary. Therefore, I am convinced that the petitioner has made out valid grounds to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the BNSS. Hence, I hold that the petitioner is entitled to an order of pre-arrest bail, but subject to the condition that the petitioner co-operates with the Investigating Officer. In the result, the application is allowed subject to the following conditions: - i. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today; - ii. In the event of the petitioner's arrest, the Investigating Officer shall release the petitioner on bail on him executing a bond for ``` 8 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024`** - Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount each; - iii. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when directed by the Investigating Officer; - iv. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement or threat to the victim or her witnesses or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; - v. The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional court concerned within a period of one week from the date of his release on bail. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the said court within the said period; ``` 9 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024`** - vi. The petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence while on bail; - vii. In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law; - viii. Applications for deletion/modification of - the bail conditions shall also be filed before the court below; - ix. Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Sushila Aggarwal v. State** ``` 10 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024`** **(NCT of Delhi) And another** [2020 (1) KHC 663); - x. The observations made in this order are only for the purpose of considering the application and the same shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case to be decided by competent Courts. **Sd/C.S. DIAS JUDGE** BR ``` 11 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.5626 OF 2024`** ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 5626/2024`** ``` PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES Annexure 1TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.475 OF 2024 OF KUTHUPRAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT DATED 28.05.2024 Annexure 2A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C.NO.1119 OF 2024 OF THE HON'BLE COURT OF SESSIONS DATED 28.06.2024 ``` ``` RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURES: NIL ```