SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sri. Nyaneshwar And Anr vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 November, 2017

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201215/2017

BETWEEN:

1. NYANESHWAR S/O GUNDAPPA BHATARE
AGE: 28 YEARS OCC: COOLIE
(ACCUSED NO.1)
2. GUNDAPPA S/O NINGAPPA BHATARE
AGE: 60 YEARS OCC: NIL
BOTH ARE R/O: JOGEWADI
TQ: BASAVAKALYAN DIST: BIDAR-585401.
(ACCUSED NO.2) … PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.S.S.MAMADAPUR, ADV)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH MANTHAL POLICE STATION BIDAR
REPRESENTED BY ITS SPP
ADVOCATE GENERAL’S OFFICE
HIGH COURT BUILDING
KALABURAGI-585103. … RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.P.S.PATIL, HCGP)
2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE
THEM ON BAIL IN MANTHAL POLICE STATION CRIME
NO.111/2017 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF THE
DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961 AND SECTION 498A,
306, 304B R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON
THE FILE OF II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, BIDAR SITTING AT BASAVAKALYAN.

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

ORDER

Heard, the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned High Court Government Pleader for the

respondent – State.

2. The petition is filed under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C. by the petitioners/accused seeking bail in Crime

No.111/2017 of Manthal Police Station. The offences

alleged against the petitioner are punishable under

Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and

Sections 498A, 306 and 304B R/w Section 34 of IPC.
3

3. The complaint is filed on 30.07.2017 by one

Baburao s/o Jairam Saibanne, stating that he has four

children. Her daughter Pooja’s marriage with accused

No.1 Nyaneshwar had taken place during the year 2014.

After the marriage few months there is cordial

relationship between husband and wife. They have no

issues. Accused No.1 was making mockery of the status

of the victim. Pooja was also ill-treated through demand

of dowry. Accused No.2 father-in-law was misbehaving

with her. She went to her parents house.

4. That on 19.07.2017 both the accused No.1

and 2 together had gone to the house of complainant.

After holding Panchayat, she was brought to

matrimonial home. Again on 24.07.2017 she went to

her maternal home for Nagar Panchami festival and

returned along with her husband on 29.07.2017.
4

5. On the same day at 4.30 p.m. Pooja by

pouring kerosene and set ablaze herself. In this

connection parents of the Pooja went to the spot and

came to know that Pooja sustained grievous burn

injuries over chest, stomach, back and limbs. No one

did take her to Hospital. It is also stated in the

complaint that her father-in-law was making advances

and misbehaving towards her. On enquiry Pooja

revealed that she was ill-treated heavily by the accused

persons and she unable to tolerate harassment made by

the accused No.2-mother-in-law. Hence, she dosed

herself with kerosene and set her ablaze. Thus before

closing of eyes, she is said to have stated her plight with

her father. Because of the burn injuries she

succumbed.

5

6. The case is registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry

Prohibition Act, 1961 and Sections 498A, 306, 304B

R/w Section 34 of IPC.

7. The learned HCGP opposes the bail petition

and submits that there are no grounds to grant bail to

the petitioner.

8. The learned counsel for petitioner would

submit that the accused No.3 Chandrabhaga w/o

Gundappa Bhatare has been released on bail. The bail

applications of present accused No.1 and 2 came to be

rejected by the Special Judge.

9. In the context and circumstances main

allegation is that dowry, cruelty and un-warrant

advances made by the accused No.2 on complainant.

However, in the context and circumstances of the case, I

am of the sincere view that at this stage petitioner No.2

Gundappa may be released on bail.

6

10. But not petitioner No.1 to whom a liberty to

file another bail petition after examination of CW.1 and

2.

11. Thus, I am of the view that there are no

likelihood of interfering with investigation if the bail is

granted to the petitioner No.2. However, the

apprehension of the prosecution would be resolved by

imposing conditions on the petitioner No.2.

Hence the following;

ORDER

The petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by

the petitioners is hereby partly allowed.

The petitioner No.2 is ordered to be enlarged on

bail in Cr.No.111/2017 of Manthal Police Station for the

offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the
7

Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 498A, 306,

304B R/w Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of II

Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bidar sitting at

Basavakalyan, on he executing a personal bond for a

sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with a surety for the like sum to

the satisfaction of the concerned Court subject to the

following conditions:-

-: CONDITIONS :-

i) Petitioner No.2 shall mark his attendance
before the I.O. on every Second Saturday
and Fourth Saturday of every month
between 09.00 p.m. and 10.00 p.m. till
hearing before charge is completed.

ii) Petitioner No.2 shall not terrorize or
tamper any of the prosecution witnesses.

iii) Petitioner No.2 shall not hold out threats
to the prosecution witnesses or lure them
in any manner.

iv) Petitioner No.2 shall not involve in any
criminal activities.

8

v) Petitioner No.2 shall attend the trial Court
regularly on all the dates of hearing and
shall co-operate with the learned trial
Judge to hold the trial.

vi) Petitioner No.2 shall not leave the State
without permission from the trial Court.

The petitioner No.1 is at liberty to file another

bail petition after examination of CW.1 and 2.

Sd/-

JUDGE
KJJ

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Group Rules, If You agree then JOIN HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh