LAWS(KER)-2013-9-7

PREMA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On September 02, 2013
PREMA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the second accused in a crime registered at Kasaragod Police Station, which is now under investigation. She has filed the above application seeking her release on bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code').

(2.) Petitioner filed a complaint before police alleging ill-treatment and harassment, both physical and mental, by her husband, his mother and sister. She alleged that two children were born to the spouses in their wedlock and both of them boys are aged 1= years and five months respectively. While she underwent treatment in a hospital at Mangalore her husband took away the eldest child and, later, informed her that the infant died of illness. A few days earlier he took her with the youngest child to Bombay by train, and during the journey she was in the ladies compartment and her husband with the child in the general compartment. When she reached Bombay, her husband and child were not to be seen and she reported their missing to the railway police. They sent her back to her native place the next day. That night her husband came to the house, manhandled her and left the place taking some articles. The next morning, date of filing of her complaint, her mother-in-law and sister-in-law, both coming together, abused and threw her out of the house directing her to return only with the dowry amount. Her complaint with allegations as aforesaid led to registration of the crime under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code naming three accused persons, her husband and his mother and sister.

(3.) First accused viz., Ratheesh, husband of de facto complainant, was arrested. His interrogation and materials collected in investigation revealed that de facto complainant, already mother of three children, cohabitated with him, who was then father of two children, and while they lived as husband and wife two children were born to them. While the first child was aged three months, he sold that infant for a sum of Rs.60,000/- and the next child, when it was aged six months old, was also sold for a price of Rs.One lakh, and both such sales of infants were done with the consent and knowledge of de facto complainant.