1
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.167/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI. RAMESH
S/O CHIKKAKULLAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
R/A #3302, MARKET ROAD
CHANNAPA KALYANI
NELAMANGALA
BANGALORE RURAL-562123.
… PETITIONER
(BY SRI SURESH N, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SHO, NELAMANGALA
TOWN POLICE STATION
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
REP. BY ITS GOVERNMENT
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BANGALORE CITY-562123
… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
2
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING
TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.258/2017 OF
NELAMANGALA TOWN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU
DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 302, 304B,
R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 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 498A, 302, 304B,
read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act registered in respondent police station
Crime No.258/2017.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the
3
learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for
the respondent-State.
3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on
record.
4. Looking into the allegations made in the
complaint, there are specific allegations as against the
husband, who is accused No.1, that he was insisting the
deceased to bring amount from her parental place as he
wanted to open a showroom, he was in need of money.
No doubt, the name of petitioner is also mentioned in
the complaint, but the allegations regarding other family
members are concerned, they are vague and general in
nature. The allegations are not specific as against the
petitioner. Petitioner has denied the allegations and it
is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that petitioner was staying in ground floor, whereas
4
accused No.1 and the deceased were staying in first
floor of the house. It is also stated that petitioner has
undertaken to abide by any conditions to be imposed by
this Court. It is submitted by the learned HCGP that
investigation is yet to be completed. But, looking into
the materials placed on record and as other accused
i.e., accused Nos.3 to 6, under similar set of allegations,
have been granted bail, I am of the opinion that it is a fit
case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The
respondent-Police is directed to enlarge the present
petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection
with Crime No.258/2017 registered for the above said
offences, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal
bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and shall
furnish one surety for the likesum to
the satisfaction of the arresting
authority.
5
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of
the prosecution witnesses, directly or
indirectly.
iii. Petitioner has to make himself
available before the Investigating
Officer for interrogation, as and when
called for and to cooperate with the
further investigation.
iv. The petitioner has to 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
BSR
