JOLLYAMMA JOSEPH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.332/2019 of Kodencherry Police Station, Kozhikode. The above case is registered against the petitioner, alleging offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. The petitioner is involved in five other murder cases. The allegation in all the cases is that she murdered one or other of her close relatives. I considered the bail application of the petitioner in Crime No.335/2019 earlier and, after considering all the contentions of the petitioner in that particular case, dismissed the same (Jollyamma Joseph v. State of Kerala,2020 5 KerLT 75). Similarly, the bail application filed by the petitioner in Crime No.189/2011 of Kodancherry Police Station and Crime No.980/2019 of Kodencherry Police Station were also dismissed by two other learned Judges of this Court. Therefore, even if the petitioner is released on bail in this case, she cannot come out of jail.

(2.) But simply because this court dismissed the petitioner's bail applications in three other cases, this court cannot dismiss this bail application without considering her contentions in this case. Each case has to be considered based on its merit. Similarly, this court cannot import the evidence supplied by the police in some other cases while considering the bail application in this case. This court can only bear in mind that there are criminal antecedents against the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner is a native of Kattappana, Idukki District. According to the prosecution, she fell in love with Roy Thomas and married him in 1997. There are two children in the marital relationship, namely Remo Roy and Renold Roy. All of them were living at Ponnamattam, the family house. Tom Thomas and Annamma Thomas are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the petitioner. Their family consists of three children, namely Roy Thomas, Rejo Thomas, and Renji Wilson. Rejo Thomas and Renji Wilson are well educated. The petitioner has an only pre-degree qualification. But the petitioner tries to believe all the family members that she had passed B.Com and M.Com. It is the prosecution case that she forged photostat copy of certificates as her certificates and showed the family members to get them believed about her qualifications. Believing the petitioner's words that she is qualified, the mother-in-law Annamma Thomas had insisted the petitioner to carry on the study to attain some job. To evade from the regular reminding from Annamma Thomas, the petitioner had gone to her native place at Kattappana, stating that she is attending B.Ed Course. Later, the petitioner intimated the relatives that she had completed B.Ed course. After the retirement of Annamma Thomas from her service, the petitioner was compelled by the mother-in-law to get some job. It has irritated the petitioner, and she left home, stating that she got a Guest Lecturer post in St.Thomas College, Pala. After that, she will come to the family and meet her kids only on weekends. Then the petitioner realised that Annamma Thomas might get some information regarding her real life. Therefore, it is the prosecution case that the petitioner decided to end the life of Annamma Thomas.