1

BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT

ERNAKULAM

BAIL APPLICATION No. of 2021

In
(Crime number 0731/2021 registered at Kurathikadu Police Station)

Petitioner/Accused Nos. 1-3:-

1. Edwinson. E, Aged 32 years,

S/o Edward O.M, Edwin Bhavan,
Chengamanad, Melila Village P.O Kottarakara Taluk
Kollam District. PIN 691 557

2. Grecy, Aged 65 years,

w/o Edward O.M, Edwin Bhavan,
Chengamanad, Melila Village P.O Kottarakara Taluk
Kollam District. PIN 691 557

3. Edward O.M, Aged 70 years,

Edwin Bhavan, Chengamanad,
Melila Village P.O Kottarakara Taluk
Kollam District. PIN 691 557

V/s.

Respondents/State & Complainant: -

1. The State of Kerala, represented by

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala,
Ernakulam, Kochi, Pin – 682 031.

2. The Station House Officer,

Kurathikadu Police Station,
Alappuzha District, Pin – 690 107

MEMORANDUM OF BAIL APPLICATION FILED UNDER

SECTION 438 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL
 2

A. Address of service of the petitioners is that of their counsel,

BABU S. NAIR & BHARATH MOHAN, Advocates, Babu S. Nair
& Co., Opp: “The Virus’, Pottakuzhi Road, Kochi-12.

B. Address for service of the respondent is as shown above.

The petitioners above named beg to state as follows: -

1. The petitioners herein stand falsely implicated in Crime No

731/2021 registered by the 2nd respondent alleging offences

punishable under section 498 A r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal

Code. The true copy of the FIR No. 0731/2021 of Korathikadu

Police station, Alappuzha district dated 21/10/2021 is

produced herein and marked as Annexure A1. The above crime

was registered by the Police against the Petitioners based on the

complaint by the wife of the 1st petitioner.

2. It is submitted that the 1 st petitioner and defacto complainant

are husband and wife. The marriage between the 1 st petitioner

and the defacto complainant was solemnized on 4 th December

2014 in compliance with the customary practices of the

Pentecost community at the Pentecost mission, Melilla village. A

male child was born out of this wedlock.

3. At the time of marriage, the 1st petitioner was employed as a

computer service engineer at Qatar and the defacto complainant

was employed as a nurse at Thiruvalla Medical Mission from

2014. The defacto complainant had behaved rudely and

indifferently towards the 1st Petitioner from the very beginning of

 3

the marriage. The defacto complainant had withdrawn herself

from the matrimonial relation and left the house of the 1 st

petitioner without any reason. Further, the 1st petitioner was

prevented from visiting his only child. Thereafter, the 1 st

petitioner had sent a legal notice to the defacto complainant on

9/09/2020 demanding the defacto complainant to return to the

matrimonial house with the child. The mediation talks between

the parties were a failure and the 1 st petitioner had filed (DIV)OP

No 84/2021 before the Hon’ble Family court Kotarakkara for

restoration of conjugal rights. Thereafter, the defacto

complainant left for Qatar to work as nurse along with the child

and had completely withdrawn from the matrimonial relation

with the 1st petitioner.

4. Now the defacto complainant had lodged the complaint alleging

matrimonial cruelty against the petitioner under Section 498A

of the Indian Penal Code. It is respectfully submitted that the

entire allegations against the petitioners are incorrect and hence

denied. The allegations are general in nature, and all the

allegations, are the usual ones, without any direct or specific

allegations against the petitioner. The marital tie is still intact,

and the 1st petitioner has no issue with the de facto

complainant.

5. It is also submitted that the petitioner and the de facto

complainant were residing separately for more than a year. The

de facto complainant was residing in Qatar and was not keeping

any relation with the petitioners. In such a situation, the

 4

allegations raised against the petitioner and his family under

Section 498A of the IPC are without any basis.

6. The Hon’ble supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar

and Another (2014) 8 SCC 273, held that no arrest should be

made in a dubious or routine manner just because a complaint

is filed under Section 498A of the IPC. The court laid down

guidelines for preventing the misuse of Section 498A of the IPC.

The Court also noted as follows:

“The fact that Section 498-A is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent

it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons

rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get

the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number

of cases, bed-ridden grand-fathers and grand-mothers of the husbands, their

sisters living abroad for decades are arrested.”

7. The petitioners are innocent of the charge alleged against them,

and the petitioners are law-abiding citizen having no criminal

antecedents. The Petitioners apprehend that they will be

arrested in connection with the crime any moment by the police.

If the petitioners are arrested, they will be put to much hardship

and humiliation. Even the chances of reconciliation, and

reunion of the spouses will be spoiled, if the petitioners are

arrested and detained.

8. The petitioners have not moved any application for anticipatory

bail before this Hon’ble Court or any other courts so far. The
 5

Petitioners also undertake that they will not move any

application for the same relief before this Hon’ble Court or any

other courts, till the disposal of this application.

In the circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that this

Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to enlarge the

petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in the above-mentioned

complaint filed by the respondent at Kurathikadu Police Station,

Alappuzha District, in the interests of justice.

Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2021

BABU S. NAIR
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS:
 6

PRESENTED ON: 02-10-2021

ANTICIPATORY BAIL

BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT

ERNAKULAM

BAIL APPLICATION No. OF 2021

Edwinson.E & others …. Petitioners

V.
The State of Kerala & Another …. Respondents

INDEX
========================================================
Sl.No. Particulars Page Nos.

=========================================================

1. Synopsis A-C

2. Bail Application 1–5

3. Annexure A1:-True copy of the F.I.R against the petitioners

Dated 21/10/2 in Korathikadu Police station. 6-9

Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2021

 7

BABU S. NAIR
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER:

BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT

ERNAKULAM

BAIL APPLICATION No. of 2021

Edwinson.E & others …. Petitioners

V.
The State of Kerala & Another …. Respondents

SYNOPSIS

Application for Anticipatory bail. The petitioners herein stand falsely

implicated in Crime No 731/2021 registered by the 2 nd respondent

alleging offences punishable under section 498 A r/w Section 34 of

Indian Penal Code. The true copy of the FIR No. 0731/2021 of

Korathikadu Police station, Alappuzha district dated 21/10/2021 is

produced herein and marked as Annexure A1. The above crime was

registered by the Police against the Petitioners based on the oral

complaint by the wife of the 1st petitioner.

It is submitted that the 1st petitioner and defacto complainant are

husband and wife. The marriage between the 1 st petitioner and the

defacto complainant was solemnized on 4th December 2014 in

compliance with the customary practices of the Pentecost community

at the Pentecost mission, Melilla village. A male child was born out of

this wedlock.
 8

At the time of marriage, the 1 st petitioner was employed as a computer

service engineer at Qatar and the defacto complainant was employed

as a nurse at Thiruvalla Medical Mission from 2014. The defacto

complainant had withdrawn herself from the matrimonial relation and

left the house of the 1st petitioner without any reason. Further, the 1 st

petitioner was prevented from visiting his only child. Thereafter, the 1 st

petitioner had sent a legal notice to the defacto complainant on

9/09/2020 demanding the defacto complainant to return to the

matrimonial house with the child. The mediation talks between the

parties were a failure and the 1 st petitioner had filed (DIV)OP No

84/2021 before the Hon’ble Family court Kotarakkara for restoration

of conjugal rights.

Thereafter, the defacto complainant left for Qatar to work as nurse

along with the child and had completely withdrawn from the

matrimonial relation with the 1st petitioner. Now, the defacto

complainant had lodged the complaint alleging matrimonial cruelty

against the petitioner under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and

Another (2014) 8 SCC 273, held that no arrest should be made in a

dubious or routine manner just because a complaint is filed under

Section 498A of the IPC. The court has also laid down guidelines to

prevent unnecessary arrest of the accused by the police and to prevent

the misuse of Section 498 of the IPC by disgruntled wives.

The petitioners are innocent of the charge alleged against them, and

the petitioners are law-abiding citizen having no criminal antecedents.

The Petitioners apprehend that they will be arrested in connection

 9

with the crime any moment by the police. If the petitioners are

arrested, they will be put to much hardship and humiliation. Hence

this application.

Chronological list of events: -

04/12/2014 - Marriage between the 1st petitioner and the defacto

complainant was solemnized.

17/10/2018 – Male child was born out of this wedlock.

09/04/2021 – (Div) OP No.84/2021 filed before the Hon’ble Family

Court Kotarakkara for restitution of conjugal rights.

25/06/2021 – Defacto complainant left for Qatar to work as a nurse.

21/10/2021 – F.I.R was registered against the petitioners 1 to 3 by

Kurathikadu Police Station.

Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2021

 10

BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF

KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Application No. of 2021

In
(Crime number 0731/2021 registered at Kurathikadu Police Station)

Edwinson.E & others …. Petitioners

V.

The State of Kerala & Another …. Respondents

MEMORANDUM OF BAIL APPLICATION FILED UNDER

SECTION 438 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

M/S.BABU S. NAIR (K/1302/1995)

&
BHARATH MOHAN (K/1392/2020)
ADVOCATES, KOCHI-12.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$