LAWS(KER)-2019-10-45

SANTHOSH KUMAR A. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On October 23, 2019
Santhosh Kumar A. Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been arrayed as the sole accused in the instant Crime No.662/2019 of Taliparamba Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Sec.302 of the IPC.

(2.) The prosecution case in short is that, the petitioner and the victim are spouses who were having serious matrimonial disputes between them, and they lived together in the same house for only about 18 days, and due to serious quarrels and disputes, the petitioner and his mother had left the house and the lady was staying in the house belonging to the petitioner, and that the petitioner had demanded the lady to vacate the house for which she demanded Rs.15 lakhs as compensation, and that on 31.5.2019 at about 7.30 pm the petitioner had entered into the house where the lady victim was residing and had struck on her neck with a sharp weapon (കത ൾ) and as a result of the grievous injuries sustained by her the victim was immediately taken to AKG Memorial Co-Operative Hospital, Kannur, and at about 10.05 pm on the same day (31.5.2019) she had died due to the injuries, and thereby the petitioner has committed the abovesaid offence. The petitioner has been arrested on 01.06.2019 and has been under judicial custody since then.

(3.) Smt.P.Sheeba, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner/accused could urge that the petitioner had voluntarily and immediately surrendered before the Investigating Officer concerned on the same day of the incident and consequent to his remand, he has now been under detention for the last 135 days since 01.06.2019 onwards. It is also pointed out on behalf of the petitioner that investigation in this case has already been fully completed and the final report/charge sheet has also been duly filed and that the case is now pending in committal proceedings before the jurisdictional Magistrate's court concerned and that the continued detention of the petitioner may no longer be necessary. Further, pertinently the learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and that this Court may order to release him on regular bail, subject to any stringent conditions, at least on humanitarian consideration.