Allowed

Dipin Kumar R v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Jan 2022Bail Appl./62/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Supreme Court adjoint a Single Judge granted anticipatory bail to three accused persons charged with offences under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court held that custodial interrogation was not necessary and allowed the bail subject to standard conditions, including execution of a bond and refraining from contacting the complainant.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to execution of a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, appearance before the investigating officer, and prohibition on contacting the complainant or influencing witn

Dipin Kumar R Vs State of Kerala — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 24TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 62 OF 2022

¶6

CRIME NO.2382/2021 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION,

¶7

PATHANMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

1 DIPIN KUMAR R AGED 33 YEARS MANNIL MALAYIL HOUSE, VALLAMKULAM P O, THIRUVALLA, ERAVIPEROR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689101

¶10

2 M S LATHA AGED 55 YEARS W/O RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, MANNIL MALAYIL HOUSE, VALLAMKULAM P O, THIRUVALLA, ERAVIPEROR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 3 DEEPTHI R PILLAI AGED 35 YEARS W/O RENJITH, KOTTARATHIL HOUSE, VALLAMKULAM, THIRUVALLA, ERAVIPEROR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV K.S.ARUNDAS

¶11

RESPONDENT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

¶13

SRI. M.C. ASHI (PP)

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶15

14.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE

FOLLOWING:

B.A. No. 62 of 2022

GOPINATH.P, J

B.A. No. 62 of 2022

¶21

Dated this the 14^th day of January, 2022

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.2382/2021 of Thiruvalla Police Station, Pathanamthitta District alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code read with 34 of that code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶24

The first petitioner got married to the de facto complainant on 09.05.2019. The second petitioner is the mother of the first petitioner and the third petitioner is his sister. The allegation against the petitioners is that after the marriage of the first petitioner and the de facto complainant they treated her with cruelyand subjected her to mental and physical harrassement on account of a demand for dowry.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there were certain disputes between the first petitioner and the de facto complainant which were settled through Annexure-A1 agreement executed on 11.11.2019. It is submitted that the petitioner and the de facto complainant live together as husband and wife only for a very short period since several disputes arose between them the matter was settled as seen from Annexure-A1. It is also submitted that the petitioner has now initiated proceedings before the Family Court, Thiruvalla for divorce. It is submitted that all the gold and

¶26

B.A. No. 62 of 2022

¶27

¶28

other ornaments belonging to the de facto complainant were returned in terms of Annexure-A1 order. It is submitted that consdiering the nature of the allegations against the petitioners their custodial interrogation isnot necessary.

¶29

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. Learned Public Prosecutor with reference to the contents of the first information statement of the de facto complainant vehemently opposes the grant of Anticipatory Bail .

¶30

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be necessary for the purpose of proper investigation in Crime No.2382/2021 of Thiruvalla Police Station, I am of the view that they can be granted Anticipatory Bail subject to conditions.

¶31

In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.2382/2021 of Thiruvalla Police Station Station subject to the following conditions:-

¶32

(i) Petitioners shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶33

(ii) Petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.2382/2021 of Thiruvalla Police Station whenever called upon to do so;

¶34

B.A. No. 62 of 2022

¶35

¶36

(iii) Petitioners shall not attempt to contact the de facto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.2382/2021 of Thiruvalla Police Station;

¶37

(iv) Petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶38

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating officer in Crime No.2382/2021 of Thiruvalla Police Station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.

¶39

Sd/-GOPINATH.P JUDGE

¶40

lsn

Dipin Kumar R v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipin Kumar R v. State of Kerala

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

Xxxx Vs the State of Kerala

Arshad Vs State of Kerala

Xxxxx Vs the State of Kerala

Saidu Mohammed.a., Vs State of Kerala

Shinu Shaji @ Ambadi Vs State of Kerala

Ajmal T Vs State of Kerala