This is an application for anticipatory filed by the accused in Crime No.146/2014 of Bediadka Police station under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that on 13.3.2014 at about 9.30 a.m, the accused, who is the husband of the defacto complainant, trespassed into the work place of the defacto complainant and inflicted simple hurt by beating her and also caused damage to her mobile phone and thereby he had committed the offence punishable under Sections 452, 427 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he is innocent of the same. There are matrimonial disputes pending before the family court between the petitioner and the defacto complainant and as a counter blast to the same, a false complaint has been filed. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner also is not required. So he prayed for allowing the application.
4. The application was opposed by the Public Prosecutor on the ground that investigation is not over.
5. Heard both sides and perused the case diary file produced.
6. It is seen from the case diary file that the above case was registered on the basis of a statement given by the defacto complainant, who is none other than the wife of the petitioner, alleging commission of the offence under Sections 452, 427 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also seen from the case diary file that on the basis of the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a crime has been registered alleging the offence under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code also against the petitioner. Further, it is also seen from the allegations in the petition that there are petitions pending before the family court also and it is during the pendency of this petition that the present crime has been registered. Except the offence under Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code, other offences are bailable in nature.
7. It is true that the petitioner had filed an application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions court, Kasaragod and the same was dismissed by the Sessions Judge as per the order in Crl.M.P.No.865/2014 dated 3.4.2014. But on going through the allegations and also considering the fact that it is a dispute between the husband and wife and incarceration of the petitioner may likely to stall the possibility of settlement in future, this Court feels that it is a fit case where power under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who is the sole accused in the above crime. So the application is allowed as follows.
i. If the petitioner arrested in connection with Crime No.
146/2014 of Bediadka police station, then the respondent is directed to release the petitioner on bail on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/respondent/ investigating officer as the case may be.
ii. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for two consecutive days between 9 am and 12 noon for the purpose of interrogation in connection with the above crime immediately after his arrest and release and thereafter as and when required by him for this purpose in writing to do so till the final report is filed.
iii. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer on the last Saturday of every month between 9 am and 10 am till the final report is filed.
iv. The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
v. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case as well.
vi. If the petitioner surrenders before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kasaragod and moves for regular bail, then the learned Magistrate is directed to release the petitioner on bail on the same conditions as stated above.
With the above conditions, this petition is allowed.
Sd/-
K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.
cl /true copy/ P.S to Judge