IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8217/2017
G E PRAKASH
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT GANDHI NAGARA VILLAGE,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 577551
(BY SRI. PAVAN SAGAR FOR
SRI PRASANNA KUMAR P, ADVS.)
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY DAVANAGERE RURAL POLICE STATION,
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-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.269/2017 OF DAVANAGERE RURAL P.S.,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss.3
AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT AND SECTIONS 498A,
302, 304B R/W. 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1
under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail
for the offences punishable under Sections 304B, 302
and 498A read with section 34 of IPC and also under
Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered in
respondent police station, crime No.269/2017.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for petitioner/accused No.1, so also the
learned High Court Government Pleader for the
respondent – State.
3. The deceased is the wife of the present
petitioner. the prosecution case in brief is that, she was
given in marriage to accused No.1 in the year 2013.
There afterwards, the petitioner and his family members
stated illtreatment to the deceased and insisting her to
bring the dowry amount from her parental place.
Deceased used to inform the parents over the phone
about the illtreatment. The further allegation is that, the
complainant was informed that his sister is dead.
Hence, the complainant along with others went to the
house of accused No.1 and saw the deceased.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
made the submission that, looking to the complaint
averments, similar allegations are made against all the
petitioners. The parents of the accused No.1 alongwith
accused No.2 approached this Court seeking their
release on bail. This Court after considering the merits
of the case, allowed the petition in part and granted bail
to the in-laws of the deceased but rejected the bail
petition in respect of accused No.2. On the basis of that,
the learned counsel for the petitioner made the
submission that by imposing reasonable conditions,
petitioner/accused No.1 may be granted bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government
Pleader made the submission that looking to the
prosecution material, there is a prima facie case. Hence,
he submitted that it is not a case for grant of bail as the
petitioner is the main accused. There are serious
allegations as against the petitioner that he used to
assault the deceased insisting her to bring the dowry
amount. Hence, he submitted that as per the medical
opinion, death is because of the strangulation.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed in
the case so also I have perused the bail order of this
Court dated 10.10.2017 in Criminal Petition
No.7475/2017. Looking to the observations made in the
said Criminal Petition, the order itself indicates that
petitioner No.3 therein is aged 89 years old lady who is
unable to move independently. So far as petitioner No.1
therein is concerned, he is also suffering from ailments
because of a fracture which was a reason prayed for
grant of bail to the father of the petitioner herein.
Insofar as paragraph No.5 of the order is concerned, the
first petitioner – accused No.2 is concerned, at this stage,
there is a material to inform that it is not a natural
death. In all probabilities, he was present in the house
when the victim breathed her last in the matrimonial
house. Therefore, looking to that, even in the earlier bail
order also this Court has observed that there is prima
facie material to show that the incident has taken place
in the house of the petitioner herein. He being the
husband, he is accountable to explain the circumstances
due to which the death has taken place.
7. Looking to the material placed on record and
even earlier bail order, I am of the opinion that it is not a
fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the
Hence, petition is hereby rejected.