THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2018
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10256/2017
Smt. Umadevi K,
W/o. S.M. Munegowda,
Aged 40 years,
R/at Seethakempanahalli Village,
Hesaraghatta Hobli, Kakolu,
Bangalore North Taluk,
Bangalore -560 089. …Petitioner
(By Sri. Nalina K. Advocate)
State of Karnataka by
Rajanukunte Police Station,
Bangalore -560 064. …Respondent
(By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the
event of her arrest in Cr.No.273/2017 of Rajanukunte
Police Station, Bangalore for the offence P/U/S 304B,
302, 307 and 498A 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.3
and to direct the respondent police to release the
petitioner/accused -3 on bail for the alleged offence
No. 273/2017 of Rajanukunte Police Station, Bangalore.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner/accused No.3 and also the
learned High Court Government Pleader for the
3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produced in
the case. One Rajani is the deceased in this case and the
father of the deceased is the complainant. It is alleged in
the complaint that the accused No.1 and 2 were insisting
his daughter to bring additional dowry amount. On the
basis of the complaint, FIR also came to be registered
against accused No.1 Ananda Gowda and accused No. 2
Munithayamma. Perusing the contents of the complaint it
is found, absolutely there is no allegation so far as the
petitioner herein is concerned. Even the name of the
petitioner is not taken in the complaint. FIR is registered
only against accused No.1 and 2. Petitioner herein
contended in the bail petition that she is innocent and
not involved in committing the offence. She is ready to
abide by any reasonable conditions that may be imposed
by this Court.
4. Therefore, looking to the materials placed on
record, as there is no allegations against the petitioner,
so also the petitioner being a woman aged 40 years, I am
of the opinion that, it is a fit case to exercise the
discretion in favour of accused No.3.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused No.3 is granted anticipatory bail by
imposing reasonable conditions. Respondent police are
hereby directed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the
event of her arrest for the alleged offence punishable
No.273/2017, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond
for Rs.1,00,000/- and 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 shall make herself available
before the Investigating Officer for
interrogation as and when called for and
to cooperate with further investigation.
Since the main petition is disposed, the question of
I.A.No.1/2017 for interim bail does not survive for
consideration. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2017 is dismissed.