IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF JANUARY, 2018
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9104 OF 2017
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/O THORANAHALLI VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, MALUR – TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT – 563 160 …PETITIONER
(BY SRI.GIREESHA.J.T, ADV.,)
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY AVALAHALLI P.S.
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE – 560 001 …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.62/2017 OF AVALAHALLY POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 304B, 498A
R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3, 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused
bail for the offences punishable under Sections 304B,
Dowry Prohibition Act, registered in respondent – police
station in Crime No.62/2017.
2. The mother of the deceased is the
complainant in this case, wherein it is stated that her
daughter was given in marriage to accused No.1 about
three years prior to the incident. For the period of one
year the couple lead happy marital life. Thereafterwards
they started to ill treat her and they have also harassed
to bring dowry amount from her parental place. The
further statement goes to show that even one day earlier
to the incident deceased went to her husband place and
then come back and she committed suicide in the house
of the complainant. On the basis of the said complaint
case came to be registered for the said offences.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the
learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader
opposes the petition on the ground that death has taken
within seven years from the date of the marriage and
looking to the complaint averments there are allegations
that they insisted to bring the dowry amount. He also
submitted that the deceased left the death note, wherein
also allegations are made as against all the accused
persons that they were giving ill treatment in connection
with the dowry amount. Hence, petitioner is not entitled
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
made the submission that looking to the complaint
averments similar set of allegations are made as against
all the accused persons and accused No.3 approached
this Court seeking anticipatory bail. This Court by order
dated 9.11.2017 allowed the petition in Crl. P.
No.7742/2017. He has produced the copy of the said
order also. Hence he made the submission that looking
to the observation at para 6 of the said bail order is
material for the purpose of the present bail petition also.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on
7. It is no doubt true that the incident has
taken place within seven years from the date of
marriage but the incident took place in the house of the
complainant and not in the house of the
petitioner/Accused No.1. Now the investigation is
completed and charge sheet is also filed. The
petitioner/accused No.1 has contended in the petition
that he is innocent and they never ill treated the
deceased and never insisted her to bring dowry amount
from the parental place. The alleged offence is not
exclusively punishable for death or imprisonment for
life. Therefore by imposing reasonable conditions he
can be admitted to regular bail.
8. Accordingly, petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused No.1 is ordered to be released on
bail for the offence punishable under Sections 304B,
station in Crime No.62/2017. subject to the following
i. Petitioner has to execute a personal
bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and has to
furnish one surety for the likesum to
the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of
the prosecution witnesses, directly or
iii. Petitioner has to appear before the
concerned Court regularly.