Nayaj Ahammed @ Nayaj vs State Of Karnataka on 2 June, 2017

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JUNE 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3747/2017

BETWEEN:

NAYAJ AHAMMED @ NAYAJ
S/O LATE RIYAZ AHAMMED
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
R/AT NO.3317, 7TH MAIN
3RD CROSS, VIDYARANYAPURAM
MYSURU
MYSURU DISTRICT – 577 117. …PETITIONER

(BY SRI B.LETHIF, ADV.)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY VIDYARANYAPURA POLICE STATION
MYSURU
MYSURU DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE – 560 001. …RESPONDENT

( BY SRI CHETAN DESAI, HCGP.)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.114/2016 OF VIDYARANYAPURAM P.S., MYSURU CITY
FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 498A AND 304B OF IPC.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner/accused and the learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

2. The petitioner is charge sheeted by the

respondent-police in their Cr.No.114/16 in respect of the

offence punishable under sections 498-A, 304-B and 306 of

IPC.

3. The allegation is, the deceased Rathna and the

petitioner married on their own and were residing together.

Rathna was a widow having a female child. However, she

gave birth to a male child from her relationship with the

petitioner. The petitioner was an alcoholic and was not

earning. He used to pester the deceased for money. The

petitioner had illicit relationship with another woman and

brought her to the house. However, on the deceased and

her mother taking exception, said woman excused. On

15.11.2016 the petitioner quarreled with the deceased and
-3-

physically harassed her. Frustrated by his torturous

treatment, she committed suicide by hanging herself.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

in fact the deceased and the petitioner were not married. It

was a living together relationship. The post mortem report

does not evince mark of violence on the body of the

deceased. The petitioner is not a criminal. Investigation

having been complete, the petitioner may be enlarged on

bail.

5. Learned Government Pleader opposing the

petition submits that, whether or not there is a legal

marriage between the petitioner and the deceased, is not

the crux of the matter. He has harassed the deceased,

brought another woman to the same house only to see that

the deceased is harassed. If he is enlarged on bail, he will

tamper with the witnesses.

Perused the prosecution papers. Having noticed that

the nature of the allegation requires the prosecution to
-4-

establish their case by way of circumstantial evidence, the

petitioner need not be continued in custody.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is

enlarged on bail in Crime No.114/2016 of respondent-

police, subject to the following conditions:

(i) He shall execute a self bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the
concerned Court.

(ii) He shall attend the Court on all hearing
dates regularly and punctually.

(iii) He shall not terrorize the prosecution
witnesses.

Sd/-

JUDGE
Dvr:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *