Karnataka High Court G.D. Thippeswamy vs State By P.S.I on 3 July, 2014Author: Budihal R.B.

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF JULY 2014 BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3720/2014

BETWEEN:

G.D. Thippeswamy,

S/o. G.S. Dhanappa,

Aged about 37 years,

Lorry Driver,

R/o. Masthur Village,

Davanagere Taluk &

District-575 234. .. PETITIONER (By Sri. Vishwajith Rai. M, Adv.) AND:

State by P.S.I.,

Jagalur Police Station,

Jagalur,

Rep. by its S.P.P.,

High Court Building,

Bangalore-560 001. .. RESPONDENT (By Sri. B.J. Eswarappa, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.52/2014 of Jagalur P.S., Davanagere, for the offences P/U/S 498A, 306, 114 r/w Section 34 of IPC 2

and also under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: ORDER

This petition is filed by petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306, 114 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered in respondent-police station Crime No.52/2014.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners-accused No.1 and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

3. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint, order passed by the lower Court on the bail application and also the entire charge sheet material produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner along with the petition. 3

4. Looking to the allegations in the complaint it is stated that the marriage of the deceased with the present petitioner was performed about 8 years back and after the marriage when the deceased had been to her husband’s house, petitioner started giving ill- treatment and harassment to her. It is also alleged that accused Nos.2 and 3 were instigating accused No.1 to give such ill-treatment and that all the three accused persons were insisting the deceased to get share in her parents’ property. The petitioner was coming to the house in a drunken state and was assaulting the deceased and deceased used to inform to the complainant about the ill-treatment and harassment meted out to her. On the basis of these allegations, case has been registered against the petitioner and two other accused persons.

5. Perusing the materials on record, there is no mention that the petitioner and other two accused persons were insisting the deceased to bring dowry 4

amount from her parental place. But the only allegation that they insisted to get 2 acres of landed property from her parental place and the allegation is same against all the accused persons. Earlier also petitioner had approached this Court seeking his release on bail and this Court by order dated 28.4.2014 in Crl.P.No.2052/2014 rejected the petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach either the Sessions Court or this Court after completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet. Now, looking to the material produced in the case it goes to show that investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed. In the bail petition it is the contention of the petitioner that he never insisted the deceased to bring 2 acres of landed property nor gave ill-treatment or harassment to her. On the date of alleged incident he was not at all in the house. The allegation against all the accused persons are one and the same. The marriage of the deceased with the petitioner also had been performed 8 years prior to the alleged incident. When under the similar 5

set of circumstances, accused Nos.2 and 3 have been granted bail and now the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed and the alleged offences are also not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life, therefore, by imposing conditions to secure the presence of the accused during trial, he can be admitted to bail.

6. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306, 114 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered in respondent-police station Crime No.52/2014, subject to following conditions:- (i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and furnish one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of concerned Court. (ii) He shall not intimidate or tamper with prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

6

(iii) He shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.

SD/-

JUDGE

bkp