Arun vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

These are applications for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Petitioner in BA No.5029/2022 is the first accused while, petitioner in BA No.5013/2022 is the 2nd accused in Crime No.15/2020 of the Anthikkad Police Station, Thrissur. The second accused is the mother of the first accused.

The prosecution alleges that the 1st accused had married the daughter of the 2nd respondent on 22.12.2019, and while they were living together, the wife of the 1st accused was found in an unconscious state in the bathroom of her matrimonial house on 06.01.2020 at around 8.15 pm and was declared as brought dead at the hospital on the same day.

Though the investigation commenced immediately, alleging an inept investigation, the 2nd respondent moved this Court through a writ petition and at the direction of this Court, the case was transferred to the Crime Branch. The crime has now been re-numbered as 84/CB/TSR/2020 of Crime Branch Thrissur. After the Crime Branch took over the investigation, and on the basis of the opinion of the Medical Board, the offence under Section 304B was added and the petitioners were arrayed as accused. Both petitioners were arrested on 10.06.2020.

Sri.M.Revikrishnan, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioners were arrested on 10.06.2022, and the investigation had been going on for the last two years with the first petitioner subjecting himself to repeated polygraph tests, while the 2nd petitioner subjected herself to a polygraph test on 09.06.2022. It was submitted that no purpose would be served by continuing the detention of the petitioners any further. The learned Counsel submitted that petitioners are totally innocent of the crime, and that the allegations would not even constitute an offence under Section 304B IPC.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand contended that, 2nd respondent was alleging that the investigation was not being conducted properly and it was in such circumstances that the Crime Branch was deputed to investigate into the case and thereafter, the offence under Section 304B IPC was added and investigation has only commenced. It was submitted that grant of bail to the petitioner at this juncture would prejudice the entire prosecution case, especially since, the petitioners may tamper with the evidence and also influence the witnesses.

Sri.Sojan Micheal learned Counsel for the additional 2nd respondent - father of the victim submitted that the entire confusion in the case was created by the petitioners themselves, which has resulted in the investigation lagging behind the last two years. He pointed out that, it was only after the 2nd respondent approached this Court for a CBI enquiry, that the matter was referred to Crime Branch and investigation is now proceeding in proper lines. Learned Counsel submitted that if, at this stage itself, petitioners are released on bail, the same would prejudice the investigation.

I have considered the rival contentions. The offence alleged against the petitioners as on date is under Section 304B, which deals with dowry death, where death of a woman occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances.

In spite of a Medical Board having been constituted to identify the cause of death, the Police have arrayed the petitioners only under Section 304B. As far as the petitioners are concerned, investigation has proceeded to some extent where continued detention of the petitioners may not be necessary provided sufficient safeguards for their co-operation and participation in the trial are ensured. In this context, this Court bears in mind the fact that the purpose of investigation will not be affected merely because the petitioners are released on bail.

Taking note of the seriousness of the issue involved, I perused the voluminous case diary. After being satisfied of the circumstances involved in this case, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioners is not necessary. Accordingly, I allow this bail application and direct the  petitioners  to  be  released  on  bail  on  the following conditions:

(i) 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 to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(ii) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and co-operate with all modes of investigation;

(iii) Petitioners shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the family members of the deceased.

(iv) Petitioners shall not commit any offence while they are on bail.

v) Petitioners shall surrender their passport before the Investigating Officer.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.