BY AD v. B.PRAMOD

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031. 2 SHESNA LIYAKHATH (IMPLEADED AS ADDL R2), D/O. JASMINE LIYAKHATH , NISHARA (HA) HARIPAD MUNCIPALITY X, PILAPPUZHA MURI, HARIPAD VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA 690514 (IMPLEADED AS ADDL R2 AS PER ORDER DTD 24/11/23 IN CRL.M.A.1/2023) BY ADVS. B.PRAMOD BIJU VIGNESWAR SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RENJIT GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B A No.9770 of 2023 2 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.867 of 2023 of Harippad Police Station, Alappuzha District, registered under Sections 498A read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

The prosecution allegation is that the petitioners, who are the husband and mother-in-law of the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant, subjected matrimonial cruelties, both physical and mental, demanding gold. Moreover, the 1st petitioner pronounced Talaq violating Sections 3 and 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the defacto complainant and learned Public Prosecutor.

Learned counsel for the defacto complainant as well B A No.9770 of 2023 3 as learned Public prosecutor opposed the bail application, as the available records show that the 2nd respondent was tortured physically as well as mentally by the petitioners. Annexure-R2(g) statement given by the 2nd respondent before Harippad Police Station explains the ill-treatment and harassment she had suffered at the hands of the petitioners. Annexure-R2(h) WhatsApp message 1st petitioner to the 2nd respondent will also prove the nature and attitude of the 1st petitioner towards his wife.

In order to facilitate the parties to come to a settlement, this Court had directed the parties to appear before this Court to attend mediation on 22.01.2024. Though the defacto complainant was present on that day, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the 1st petitioner is working in Delhi as a Doctor, and he is not interested in mediation, and so, mediation could not be conducted. The interim order, which was passed in favour of the petitioners that ‘they shall not be arrested’, was vacated on 22.01.2024. B A No.9770 of 2023 4

As far as the 2nd petitioner/mother-in-law is concerned, she is aged 60. Though some allegations are there against the 2nd petitioner also, with respect to the demand of bills for the gold ornaments of the defacto complainant, it is not so serious, when compared to the allegations against the 1st petitioner. So this Court is inclined to allow this application, as far as the 2nd petitioner is concerned, on the following terms: (i) The 2nd petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer on or before 08.02.2024

10.00 a.m. subject herself interrogation. The investigating officer can interrogate her and collect all materials and B A No.9770 of 2023 5 evidence within 2nd petitioner, which are relevant for the purpose of investigation. (ii) In the event of arrest, she shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. (iii) The 2nd petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the witnesses and shall not tamper with the investigation. (iv) The 2nd petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the Jurisdictional Magistrate is empowered to cancel her bail, in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 1st petitioner is ready to surrender before the investigating officer co-operate investigation. So, the 1st petitioner also can surrender before the investigating officer on or before 08.02.2024. On his arrest, he shall be produced before the B A No.9770 of 2023 6 jurisdictional Magistrate Court on the date of arrest itself and in case, he makes an application for regular bail, notice of that application shall be given to the defacto complainant also. With these directions, the application for pre-arrest bail of the 1st petitioner stands dismissed and that of the 2nd petitioner stands allowed as above. Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE DSV/- B A No.9770 of 2023 7 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9770/2023 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES : Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR 867/2023 OF THE HARIPPAD POLICE STATION DATED 12-10-2023 RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES : Annexure R-2(a) Photographs of the different part of 2nd respondent's body which bear marks of the violence. Annexure R-2(b) Proceedings of the North Wales Police along with 2nd respondent's statement recorded by the Police. Annexure R-2(c) True copy of the License Agreement dated 23.01.2023 executed with the BAWSO and the 2nd respondent for staying in the Safe House. Annexure R-2(d) True copy of the letter dated 03.02.2023 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Chennai to Mrs. Jasmine Liyakath, the mother of 2nd respondent informing her about the enquiry on her complaint. Annexure R-2(e) True copy of the scanning report dated 11.08.2023 issued from Sankar's Health Care to the 2nd respondent. Annexure R-2(f) True copy of the 'Deed of Talaq' dated 20.09.2023 issued by the 1st petitioner to the 2nd respondent Annexure R-2(g) True copy of the complaint dated 12.10.2023 submitted by the 2nd respondent to the Police. Annexure R-2(h) True copy of the What's App message issued by the 1st petitioner to the 2nd respondent.