1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8612/2017
BETWEEN:
Mr. T K Narayan
Aged about 64 years
S/o Late Kempegowda
Occ: Agriculturist
R/at No.110
Thammasandra Village
Kallahalli Post
Kasaba Hobli
Kanakapura Taluk
Ramanagara District. … PETITIONER
(By Sri D N Nanjunda Reddy, Sr. Counsel for
Sri Somashekhara A N, Adv.)
AND:
The State of Karnataka
By Chennammanakere Achhukattu Police Station
Bengaluru
Represented by the
Special Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka
Bengaluru-560 001. …RESPONDENT
(By Sri K Nageshwarappa, HCGP)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event
of his arrest in Cr. No.320/2017 of Channammanakere
Achukattu P.S., Bengaluru, for the offences P/U/Ss 427,
506, 498(A), 504, 307 and 352 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4
of Dowry Prohibition Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused
No.2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory
bail to direct the respondent-police to release the
petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the
offences punishable under Sections 427, 506, 498A,
504, 307 and 352 of IPC and also under Sections 3 and
4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered in
respondent police station Crime No.320/2017.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned senior
counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.2 and
3
also the learned High Court Government Pleader
appearing for the respondent-State.
3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and also the order of the
learned Sessions Judge rejecting the bail application of
the petitioners and also other documents produced in
the case by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. As per the complaint averments, father of one
Neeraja filed the complaint alleging that at the time of
marriage and engagement of his daughter he has paid
Rs.3,00,000/- cash and 400 gms. of gold ornaments,
watch and finger ring. After the marriage, Dr.Bharath
Kumar and his father T.K.Narayan, the petitioner
herein were giving ill-treatment and harassment to his
daughter. It is further alleged that Dr.Bharath Kumar
after the marriage took his daughter to America. Even
4
there also he was insisting her for the money and giving
ill-treatment and in that regard, the complainant has
credited the amount to the account of accused No.1. It
is further alleged in the complaint that the petitioner
and accused No.1 abused the daughter of the
complainant in filthy language and have thrown her
belongings out of house and have also made an attempt
to commit the murder of daughter of the complainant.
On the basis of the said complaint, case was registered.
5. Even as per the prosecution case there are no
injuries. The daughter of the complainant has not
taken any treatment in the hospital. Though in the
complaint there is allegation that accused persons made
an attempt to commit murder of the daughter of the
complainant, the said allegation is denied by the
petitioner-accused No.2, the father-in-law of the
daughter of the complainant.
5
6. Petitioner has contended that false allegations
are made against him and he is ready to abide by any
reasonable conditions to be imposed by the Court. He
is aged about 64 years, as mentioned in the cause title
of the petition, which fact is not disputed by the
prosecution. Apart from that, the alleged offences are
not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment
for life. Hence, I am of the opinion that petitioner can be
granted with anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The
respondent-police are directed to enlarge the petitioner
on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences
punishable under Sections 427, 506, 498A, 504, 307
and 352 of IPC and also under Sections 3 and 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered in respondent
police station Crime No.320/2017, subject to the
following conditions:
6
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal
bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and
shall furnish one surety for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the
arresting authority.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of
the prosecution witnesses, directly or
indirectly.
iii. Petitioner shall make himself available
before the Investigating Officer for
interrogation, as and when called for
and to cooperate with the further
investigation.
iv. Petitioner shall appear before the
concerned Court within 30 days from
the date of this order and to execute
the personal bond and the surety
bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE
bkp