Judgment · High Court · 2008
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
R.BASANT, J------------------------------------B.A.No.264 of 2008-------------------------------------Dated this the 17th day of January, 2008ORDERApplication for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are the husbandof the defacto complainant and his relatives. They are accused 1to 4 in a crime registered alleging the offence punishable under Section 498 A r/w 34 I.P.C.
The marriage took place on 04.12.1997. The spousesare blessed with 2 children. Matrimonial cruelty of the culpablevariety is alleged against the petitioners. The crime wasregistered on the basis of a complaint made by the defactocomplainant to the police directly. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest.
The learned counsel for the petitioners prays, thelearned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and Iam satisfied that the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail. The fact that the marriage had lasted a decade, the fact that 2children were born, the fact that the learned Public Prosecutorsubmits that the victim has not suffered any external injuriesconsequent to the alleged physical assault as also the fact that B.A.No.264 of 20082arrest and incarceration of the petitioners may close the doors ofall possibilities of harmonious settlement of the matrimonialdisputes do weigh with me in coming to this conclusion. Appropriate conditions can of course be imposed in the interestsof a fair, efficient and expeditious investigation. 3. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. Thefollowing directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.i)The petitioners shall appear before the learnedMagistrate at 11 a.m on 24.01.2008. They shall be enlarged onregular bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- (RupeesTwenty Five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties eachfor the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate; ii)The petitioners shall make themselves available forinterrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and3 p.m on 25.01.08 and 28.01.08 and thereafter between 10 a.mand 12 noon on all Mondays and Fridays for a period of 2 months. Subsequently the petitioners shall make themselves available forinterrogation before the Investigating Officer as and whendirected by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so; iii)If the petitioners do not appear before the learnedMagistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall B.A.No.264 of 20083thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty toarrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with lawas if those directions were not issued at all; iv)If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrenderon 24.01.2008 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall bereleased from custody on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) each without any suretiesundertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on24.01.2008.(R.BASANT, JUDGE)rtr/-
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 17 Jan 2008. The bench was R BASANT.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.