PRADEESH KUMAR and others v. State of Kerala and Sub Inspector of Police, Feroke Police Station

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1941** ## **BAIL APPL..NO.4811 OF 2019** **CRIME NO.431/2019 OF FEROKE POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 3 TO 6:** - **1 PRADEESH KUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.CHINNAN, PARAYIL HOUSE, THADAYAPARAMBA, VAIDHYARANGADI, RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** - **2 SOBHANA, AGED 59 YEARS, W/O.KRISHNAN, KARUMKULATHIL HOUSE, KODAKKAD.P.O, ARIYALLUR, CHETTIPADY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** - **3 KRISHNAN, AGED 64 YEARS,S/O CHOYI, KARUMKULATHIL HOUSE, KODAKKAD.P.O, ARIYALLUR, CHETTIPADY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** - **4 ROONA KRISHNAN.T, AGED 36 YEARS, W/O.SUMESH,UNIKANDAN VEETTTIL HOUSE, PARAPPANANGADI.P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** - **5 SWAROOPA KRISHNAN, AGED 31 YEARS, W/O.PRAVEEN, VADAKKETHODU HOUSE, VALLIKUNNU NORTH.P.O, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** - **BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:** - **1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.** - **2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FEROKE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673631.** **SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.J.R.PEM NAVAZ, ADVOCATE FOR DEFACTO COMPLAINANT.** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ## ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. -------------------------------B.A. No. 4811 of 2019 -------------------------------Dated this the 16[th] day of July, 2019 ## O R D E R The petitioners herein have been arrayed as accused Nos.1 & 3 to 6 in Crime No.431/2019 of Feroke Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Secs.498A, 306 r/w 34 of the IPC. The wife of the 1[st] petitioner (A1) Smt. Sandhya had committed suicide on 27.4.2019 and initially Crime No.106/2019 was registered at Vazhakkad Police Station, under Sec.174 of the Cr.P.C., on account of the abovesaid unnatural death of the lady. Much later, the said crime has now been re-registered after two months as Crime No.431/2019 of Feroke Police Station, on 2.6.2019, therein the 5 petitioners herein and another has been arrayed as the six accused persons in the said crime for the abovesaid offences. 2. The prosecution case in short is that, after the marriage of the spouses, the accused persons have treated the lady with cruelty and harassment, and that they had demanded more dowry and that they had misappropriated her gold ornaments, etc, and that it is on account of their acts, that the lady has committed B.A. No. 4811 of 2019 ..3.. suicide on 27.4.2019 etc. Accused No.2 (mother of the 1[st] petitioner/A1) has already been granted bail by the Sessions Court in this case. The 2[nd] petitioner (A3) is the sister of the 1[st] petitioner, the 3[rd] petitioner (A4) is the husband of the 2[nd] petitioner. The 4[th] and 5[th] petitioners (A5 and A6) are the daughters of the 2[nd] and 3[rd] petitioners. 3. It appears that the main material now being relied on by the prosecution in support of the allegations for inclusion of offence under Sec.306 of the IPC (abetment to commit suicide) is said to be diary written by the deceased lady, and this Court had requested the learned Prosecutor to make available an attested copy of the said diary for the perusal of this Court. Today when the case is taken up for consideration the learned Prosecutor would point out that, the investigating officer has already handed over the original diary to the competent jurisdictional Magistrate Court concerned, but had inadvertently had not kept a copy of the same in the CD file, and that an application has now been made to the said Court to get a certified copy of the same in order to make it available for the perusal of this Court. 4. Sri.Babu S.Nair, learned counsel appearing for the B.A. No. 4811 of 2019 ..4.. petitioners would point out that, the abovesaid process may take time, and that he has been instructed to submit that the 1[st] petitioner (A1) is not pressing for his prayer for anticipatory bail now, and he would file a separate application in that regard, and that the counsel is pressing anticipatory bail only for the other petitioners (petitioners 2 to 5). The counsel appearing for the petitioners would also point out that, originally the offence as per Sec.498A of the IPC, the Courts are generally liberal in the grant of anticipatory bail. Further that the only other remaining offence alleged against the accused persons is the one as per Sec.306 of the IPC, and that no proper materials has been secured by the prosecution even to remotely connect the accused persons for the offence of abetment to commit suicide as per Sec.306 of the IPC. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would point out the various decisions of the Apex Court and various High Courts including this Court regarding the legal principles laid down therein, dealing with the parameters and vital ingredients to be satisfied for disposing the offence of abetment as per Sec.107 of the IPC and the offence of abetment to commit suicide as per Sec.306 of the IPC, by citing decisions as in _**Sanju Alias Sanjay**_ B.A. No. 4811 of 2019 ..5.. _**Singh Sengar v. State of M.P. [2002 SCC (Cri) 1141 = (2002) 5 SCC 371], Krishnadas P. (Dr.) (Adv.) v. State of Kerala and Another [2017 (2) KLT 579], Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab [2016 (12) SCALE 414] and Harikrishnan and Another v. State of Kerala and Another [2019 (3) KHC 437].**_ 6. Further it is pointed out that, the petitioners' counsel is confined to his submissions in relation to the grant of anticipatory bail in the case of petitioners 2 to 5 (A3 to A6), and is pointed out that the 2[nd] petitioner herein is the sister of the 1[st] accused, and the 3[rd] petitioner is the husband of the 2[nd] petitioner and further that, the 4[th] and 5[th] petitioners are the daughters of the 2[nd] and 3[rd] petitioners. It is also pointed out that, the 5[th] petitioner is now more than 7 months pregnant as evident from Anx.A and submissions are also made that it is really too farfetched for the prosecution to conduct that by the mere alleged act of speaking insulting words to the lady, etc the accused 3 to 6 has the _mens rea_ to instigate the deceased lady to commit suicide. 7. Further it is also submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the 2[nd] to 5[th] petitioners are residing elsewhere and B.A. No. 4811 of 2019 ..6.. they were not in any manner on a long term basis residing with the deceased lady and her husband, and at best they would have happened to meet the deceased lady and her husband on family occasions, etc. 8. Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Prosecutor and Sri.J.R.Prem Navas, learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant (mother of the deceased lady) have opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. 9. Taking note of the facts and circumstances in relation to the 2[nd] to 5[th] petitioners , and also taking into account that the 2[nd] & 3[rd] petitioners happen to be the sister-in-law and brother-inlaw of the deceased lady, and the 4[th] & 5[th] petitioners happen to be the daughters of the 2[nd] & 3[rd] petitioners who are now married off, this Court is inclined to take the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners 2 to 5 (A3 to A6) is not necessary for the fair and proper conduct of investigation in the abovesaid crime. Accordingly it is ordered that, in the event of the 2[nd] to 5[th] petitioners (A3 to A6) being arrested in relation to the abovesaid Crime No.431/2019 of Feroke Police Station, then they shall be released on bail on their separately executing bonds for B.A. No. 4811 of 2019 ..7.. Rs.40,000/- each and on their separately furnishing two solvent sureties each for the like sum, both to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer concerned. 10. Further it is also ordered that the grant of bail will be subject to the following conditions:- - _i. The 2[nd] to 5[th] petitioners shall not involve in any criminal offences of similar nature._ - _ii. The 2[nd] to 5[th] petitioners shall fully co-operate with the investigation._ - _iii. The 2[nd] to 5[th] petitioners shall report before the investigating officer as and when required in that connection._ - _iv. The 2[nd] to 5[th] petitioners shall not influence witness or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner, whatsoever._ If there is any violation of the abovesaid conditions by the 2[nd] to 5[th] petitioners then the jurisdictional court concerned stand hereby empowered, to consider the plea for cancellation of bail at the appropriate time. 11. It is made clear that, this Court has not in any manner decided on the plea of the 1[st] petitioner (A1) for grant of anticipatory bail that is left open, and liberty is accorded to the 1[st] petitioner to file a fresh anticipatory bail application before B.A. No. 4811 of 2019 **==> picture [20 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** competent court or to invoke such other remedies available to him in accordance with law. With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application will stand disposed of. Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE MMG