Kerala High Court
Shanthini vs State Of Kerala on 7 July, 2021
BAIL APPL. NO. 4522 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 4522 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 99/2021 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, CHAVARA, KOLLAM
PETITIONERS/1ST AND 2ND ACCUSED
1 SHANTHINI
AGED 36 YEARS
W/O.RAJESH, PADINJATTATHI VEETTIL, NJARAMOODUBHAGATH,
KIZHAKKUMURI, THEKKUMBHAGAM MURI, CHAVARA, KOLLAM.
2 RAJESH
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, PADINJATTATHIL VEETTIL,
NJARAMOODUBHAGATH, KIZHAKKUMURI, THEKKUMBHAGAM MURI,
CHAVARA, KOLLAM.
BY ADV K.R.SUNIL
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 31.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.07.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 4522 OF 2021 2
ORDER
This second application is filed by the petitioners for their release on
bail, claiming change of circumstances in the case.
2. The prosecution case is that the petitioners who are the
daughter-in-law and son of the deceased, murdered her on 1.2.2021.
The case has been registered against them by Thekkumbhagam police
station for the offences punishable under Sections 344, 348, 302, 201
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well the learned
Public Prosecutor.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that they
have been arrested in connection with Crime No.18/2021 and in custody
since 10.2.2021. Now the investigation of the case is over and further
detention is not required for the investigating agency. It is also pointed
out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the minor children of
the petitioners are left with no one to look after and hence, this
application.
5. The application is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. Of course the investigation of the case is over and charge sheet
has been filed and the case is pending as SC No.1621 of 2021.
7. It is significant to note that the deceased was aged 75 years and
she was found dead on 1.2.2021 at her residence where the petitioners
were residing. The majority of the witnesses to the prosecution are
family members as well their neighbours. It is true that the minor
children of the petitioners are under the care of their grand parents.
Though the allegations raised against these petitioners are grave and
serious in nature as the investigation of the case is over, I think that
granting of bail to both these petitioners will give an opportunity to them
to intimidate the witnesses to the prosecution and thus to interfere with
the trial of the case. Still I am of the opinion that bail can be granted to
the first petitioner/wife of the second accused so as to enable her to take
care of her minor children.
Therefore, I think that it is not proper to grant regular bail so far as
the second petitioner is concerned. This petition is disposed of granting
regular bail to the first petitioner alone, subject to the following
conditions:
. (i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond
for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent
sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having
jurisdiction.
(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so
as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any
police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the
learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance
with the law.
This subsequent application with respect to the second petitioner
will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
SHIRCY V.
smm JUDGE
