Allowed

Jaffar.T.K., v. the Union Territory of Lakshadweep

Kerala HC15 Feb 2024Bail Appl./209/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted pre-arrest bail to the sole accused in a case involving allegations of pronouncing triple talaq under the Muslim Women Act, 2019, subject to conditions including surrender for interrogation and regular reporting.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted subject to surrender for interrogation, execution of bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties, and monthly reporting to SHO Kavaratti for three months.

Jaffar.T.K., Vs the Union Territory of Lakshadweep — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 15^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 26TH MAGHA, 1945

¶2

 BAIL APPL. NO. 209 OF 2024

¶3

 CRIME NO.1/2024 OF Amini Police Station, Lakshadweep

¶4

 PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶5

 JAFFAR.T.K., AGED 39 YEARS,
 S/O.AHAMMED.M.V., THILAKKANDIKKAM HOUSE, AMINI DWEEP,
 LAKSHADWEEP, PIN - 682552.

¶6

 BY ADVS.
 LINDONS C.DAVIS
 E.U.DHANYA
 N.S.SHAMILA
 CHINJU P. JOYIES

¶7

 RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 THE UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, LAKSHADWEEP ADMINISTRATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS STANDING COUNSEL/PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031.

¶9

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, AMINI POLICE STATION, AMINI, LAKSHADWEEP, PIN - 682552.

¶10

3 HAMEEDATHBI, AGED 28 YEARS, D/O.MOOSA, MUTHARAMEL HOUSE, AMINI ISLAND, U.T OF LAKSHADWEEP682552, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BAITHUL AMEEN HOUSE, C/O.C.N.NI.KAVARATHI ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP, PIN - 682555.

¶11

 BY ADV SHRI.SAJITH KUMAR V., SC, LAKSHADWEEP ADMINISTRATION

¶12

 SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RENJIT GEORGE

¶13

 THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
 ON 15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
 FOLLOWING:

¶14

B A No.209 of 2024 2

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, filed by the sole accused in Crime No.1 of 2024 of Amini Police Station, Lakshadweep, registered under Sections 3 and 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

¶17

The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner pronounced triple Talaq and sent a notice to the 3rd respondent-wife, and thus committed offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

¶18

Notice was ordered against the 3rd

¶19

respondent-defacto complainant and it was served on her on 15.01.2024, but there was no response from her part.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the Union Territory of Lakshadweep appearing for respondents 1 and 2.

¶21

Learned Standing Counsel opposed the bail

¶22

application.

¶23

B A No.209 of 2024 3

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner is a government employee, working as Driver in Environment and Forest Department, in Union Territory of Lakshadweep. What is prohibited under Sections 3 and 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, is Talaq-e-biddat and Annexure-A1 will show that he had invoked Talaq-e-hasan, which will be completed only if the wife accepts the same. The nature of Talaq invoked by the petitioner is a matter to be investigated, and to be proved by evidence. Since, the petitioner says that, he never pronounced triple Talaq, and Annexure-A1 Talaq is only a Talaq-e-hasan, which will be completed only if the defacto complainant accepts the same, his custodial interrogation need not be insisted.

¶25

Learned Standing Counsel would submit that the petitioner is having criminal antecedents and several crimes are pending against him. But learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, those cases were registered only on the complaint filed by the defacto complainant and that too with respect to their matrimonial issues.

¶26

B A No.209 of 2024 4

¶27

Considering all these facts, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner on the following terms:

¶28

(i) The petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer on or before 22.02.2024 and subject himself for interrogation, and the investigating officer shall collect all materials and evidence relevant for the purpose of investigation, from the petitioner.

¶29

(ii) In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

¶30

(iii) Thereafter, the petitioner shall report before SHO, Kavaratti, on the first Saturday of every month between 1.00 p.m. and 2.00 p.m., starting from 02.03.2024 for a period of three months or till the final report is filed in Crime No.1 of 2024 by Amini Police, whichever is earlier.

¶31

(iv) The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the witnesses or tamper with the investigation.

¶32

(v) The petitioner shall not leave the limits of the Union Territory of Lakshadweep without

¶33

B A No.209 of 2024 5

¶34

getting prior permission from the trial court. (vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶35

(vii) In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the Jurisdictional Magistrate is empowered to cancel his bail, in accordance with law.

¶36

Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE

¶37

 DSV/-

¶38

B A No.209 of 2024 6

¶39

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 209/2024

¶40

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES :

¶41

Annexure A1 A COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 01.04.2023 PRODUCED BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT BEFORE THE POLICE STATION.

¶42

Annexure A2 A COPY OF THE MC NO.2/2023 DATED 23.03.2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE CJM COURT, AMINI.

¶43

Annexure A3 A COPY OF THE MC NO.5/2023 DATED 06.07.2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE CJM COURT, AMINI.

¶44

Annexure A4 A COPY OF THE FIR NO.1/2024 OF AMINI POLICE STATION, LAKSHADWEEP.

¶45

 RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES : NIL

Jaffar.T.K., v. the Union Territory of Lakshadweep

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaffar.T.K., v. the Union Territory of Lakshadweep

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

Subramanian. K.K Vs State of Kerala

Amal Siby, Vs State of Kerala

Ismail Vs State of Kerala

Sumitha Sudarsan, Vs State of Kerala

Binu, Vs State of Kerala

Ummer Khan K, Vs State of Kerala