Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Chinnamma Luka vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala|25 June, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This is an application filed by the 2nd accused in in Crime No.144/2014 of Pulpally Police Station, Wayanad District, for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The case of the prosecution in a nut shell was that, on account of the abetment made by the accused persons, who are the husband and in-law of the deceased, the deceased committed suicide on 05.03.2014 at Abudhabi. She was driven to commit suicide on account of the harassment made by her for demanding dowry and thereby they have committed the offence punishable under Section 304(B), 306, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner has not committed any offence and in fact the alleged commission of suicide by the deceased happened in Abudhabi and the petitioner is residing in India and there is no nexus between the act committed by the deceased and the petitioner. So none of the offences are attracted as against the petitioner. She has been arrested on 09.06.2014 and she is in jail from that day onwards.
4. The application was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that, investigation is not over and other accused persons are yet to be arrested and in fact she had abused her and asked her to go and die and that prompted her to commit suicide.
5. Heard both sides and perused the case diary files.
6. It is an admitted fact that, first accused married the deceased and they were living as husband and wife and the marriage was solemnised on 14.05.2007 and the deceased was residing with the first accused at Abudhabi, even at the time when the alleged commission of incident/ suicide happened. The petitioner was residing in India at that time. The only allegation against the petitioner was that, she had directed her to go and die and that prompted to her to commit suicide is the allegation made. I am not at this stage going to the question, as to whether those allegations are sufficient to attract the offence under Section 306 or 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code at this stage. Anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner was dismissed. Further the present case itself has been registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the father of the deceased, which was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thereafter the case was registered and investigation is going on. After dismissal of the anticipatory bail application, the petitioner surrendered before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Sultan Bathery, on 09.06.2014 and she was remanded to custody and the bail application filed by her before the court was dismissed. She is aged 60 years old and her custody is not required any more in connection with the investigation. The apprehension of the Public Prosecutor that, if bail is granted, she is likely to interfere the investigation, can be removed by imposing some stringent conditions. So the application is allowed with following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for ₹50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Sultan Bathery.
ii. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for the purpose of interrogation on the last Saturday of every month between 9.00 a.m and 10.00 a.m for a period of three months and thereafter appear before him for the purpose as and when required in writing to do so by the investigating officer, till the final report is filed.
iii. The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
iv. Petitioner is directed to surrender her passport before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Sultan Bathery, within a week of her release and she is not having any passport file an affidavit to that effect before that court, before that time.
v. The petitioner shall not leave State of Kerala without getting prior permission either from the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Sultan Bathery, or from the court to which the case will committed for trial, till the disposal of the case.
With the above conditions the application is allowed.
Sd/-
K. Ramakrishnan, Judge // True Copy// ss P.A. to Judge
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Chinnamma Luka vs State Of Kerala

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
25 June, 2014
Judges
  • K Ramakrishnan
Advocates
  • Sri John Varghese