Allowed

Abineeth v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC26 Aug 2016Bail Appl./6153/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed bail for a petitioner accused of abetting suicide under Section 306 IPC. Finding no definite link between the accused and the victim's death, the court released him on bond with sureties and conditions regarding reporting and district restriction.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by executing bond with two solvent sureties for 50,000 each, subject to reporting and non-emigration conditions.

Abineeth Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/4TH BHADRA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6153 of 2016 () -------------------------------

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 1547/2016 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOZHIKODE DATED 16-08-2016 CRIME NO. 626/2016 OF PERAMBRA POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

ABINEETH, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O PADMANABHAN MASTER, CHERIYARAYAROTH HOUSE, CHENOLI P.O, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANTS & STATE:

¶11

1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 001.

¶12

2. STATE OF KERALA, (RESPONDENTS 1, AND 2 REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN 682 031).

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. ROY THOMAS

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

P.UBAID, J.

¶17

- - - - B.A.No. 6153 of 2016

¶18

- - - - Dated this the 26^th day of August, 2016

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime

¶21

No. 626 of 2016 of the Perambra Police Station, registered under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. He seeks regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The application filed by him for regular bail was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, on 16.8.2016. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 2.8.2016.

¶22

This crime relates to the commission of suicide by a girl aged 18 years. She had been in love with the petitioner herein, and this intimacy led to a firm decision to get married. But due to some difference of opinion, they fell apart, and this caused some disappointment. Due to the disappointment and dejection, the girl hanged herself on 27.6.2016. The crime was initially registered under Section

¶23

B.A.No. 6153 of 2016

¶24

-2-

¶25

174 Cr.P.C. on the complaint of the uncle of the deceased girl. Later, the Police could collect some materials showing that the girl had been in love with the petitioner herein, and that she committed suicide or decided to put an end to her life due to some disappointment in life in connection with the said love affair.

¶26

This application for regular bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that investigation is still in progress, and that if the accused is now released, he will definitely obstruct the investigation.

¶27

The prosecution alleges that the petitioner

¶28

was responsible for the commission of suicide, or that commission of suicide by the girl was abetted by the petitioner herein. This Court has recently settled the position as regards the essential elements for a prosecution under Section 306 of IPC. For such a prosecution, there must be direct nexus between the alleged acts of the accused, and commission of suicide by the victim. In short,

¶29

B.A.No. 6153 of 2016

¶30

-3-

¶31

commission of suicide by the victim must be the proximate result of the alleged acts or omission on the part of the accused. On a perusal of the case diary, I do not find definite materials constituting such a link. The Police has seized a suicide note written by the deceased. On a perusal of this note, I find that it does not contain anything specific indicating the cause of death, or that she decided to put an end to her life due to some positive acts on the part of the accused compelling her to commit suicide. It appears that she had her own reasons for committing suicide. The document produced by the petitioner shows that the petitioner has some psychic problems. Of course, nothing serious is found. He is said to be a student of law, and the deceased was a degree student. The prosecution records reveal that the parents on both sides had in fact agreed to the proposed marriage, but it is not known why the girl decided to kill herself, if at all there was some difference of opinion between her and the petitioner. In the nature of the

¶32

B.A.No. 6153 of 2016

¶33

-4-

¶34

materials so far collected by the Police as part of investigation, which are not fully satisfactory to establish the required link between commission of suicide, and the alleged act of abetment, I feel it appropriate to release the petitioner on appropriate conditions.

¶35

In the result, this application for bail is allowed. The petitioner will be released on bail on his executing a bond with two solvent sureties for 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty₹ Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. Bail is granted on condition that;

¶36

a. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Thursdays for a period of three months.

¶37

b. The petitioner shall not leave the Kozhikode Revenue District, till the whole investigation process is over.

¶38

B.A.No. 6153 of 2016

¶39

-5-

¶40

c. The petitioner shall not enter the revenue village where the house of the victim of offence is situated, till trial of the case is over, unless otherwise permitted by the trial court in due course of trial for sufficient reasons.

Sd/- P.UBAID

JUDGE

//True copy//

P.A. to Judge

Abineeth v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abineeth v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Sabith Vs State of Kerala

John George Vs the Station House Officer ,Halasuru Police Station

Abdul Najeeb Vs State of Kerala

Sujith Raj a. Vs State of Kerala

M.Muraleedharan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Sreekumar G. Vs State of Kerala