AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
16 paragraphs · 563 wordsDr. Kauser Edappagath, J
This application is filed u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.
The applicants are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.297/2023 of Fort Kochi Police Station. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 498A of IPC.
The prosecution case, in short, is that the de facto complainant was subjected to cruelty both physically and mentally by the applicants demanding more dowry and thereby committed the above said offence.
I have heard Sri.P.K.Rakesh Kumar, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.
The applicant No.1 is the husband of the de facto complainant. The applicant Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of the applicant No1. I went through the FIS. There are specific allegations against the applicant No.1. Moreover, the FIS would show that, on 18.02.2023, the applicant No.1 assaulted the de facto complainant. The wound certificate would show that she sustained injuries. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant No.1 is not entitled to get pre-arrest bail. However, there are no specific allegations against the applicant Nos.2 and 3. Considering the allegations levelled against them, their custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. Hence, I am of the view that the applicant Nos.2 and 3 can be granted pre-arrest bail.
In the result, the application is allowed in part on the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.
(ii) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.
(iii) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. They shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.
(iv) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.
(v) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.
(vi) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.
(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.
Pre-arrest bail as against applicant No.1 stands rejected.
