1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6535/2017
BETWEEN:
SMT.SUNANDAMMA
W/O RUDRAMUNI
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
OCC:HOUSE-HOLD
RESIDENT OF BANK COLONY,
NEAR EX. M.L.A.
BASANNA’S HOUSE,
CHITRADURGA CITY – 577 501. …PETITIONER
(BY SRI M.R.HIREMATHAD., ADV.,)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MALEBENNUR POLICE STATION
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
BANGALORE – 560 001. …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI CHETAN DESAI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.156/2017 OF
MALEBENNUR P.S., DAVANAGERE DISTRICT FOR THE
OFFENCES P/U/S 498A, 304B, 306 R/W 34 OF IPC.
2
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 498-A, 304-B, 306
r/w section 34 of IPC and under sections 3 and 4 of
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered in respondent –
police station Crime No.156/2017.
2. The allegation as per the complaint is, the
deceased was given in marriage to Accused No.1. For
some days she was happy and alright in the house of
the accused. Thereafter, accused Nos.1 and 2 started
insisting the deceased to bring dowry amount from her
parental place. In that regard, the accused persons
were advised not to give such ill treatment and
3
harassment. As per the complaint averments, it is also
the allegation that accused No.1/husband of the
deceased was also having extra marital relationship
with one lady Pavitra. When this was questioned by the
deceased, her husband A-1 told her that she can go and
die, he will not discontinue his illicit connection with
Pavitra. Then she was taken to her parental place
where she committed suicide.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the
learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for
the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner made the
submission that so far as the petitioner is concerned,
false allegations are made. She never gave such ill
treatment and harassment to the deceased insisting her
to bring dowry amount.
4
5. Learned counsel further made submission
that the deceased left the death notes wherein the
allegations are against accused Nos.1 and 3. Hence, he
submitted that in view of these materials, by imposing
reasonsable conditions, the petitioner may be granted
anticipatory bail.
6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader
made submission that investigation is still going on.
The complaint averments and the statement of the
witnesses and neighbours prima facie goes to show the
involvement of petitioner/accused No.2 also in the
alleged offences. It is also his submission, the alleged
death notes were sent for handwriting expert’s
examination. The report is still awaited. Hence he
submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for
anticipatory bail.
7. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on
5
record. Looking to the materials placed on record, the
averments in the complaint as well as the statements of
neighbours, there is prima facie allegation against the
petitioner also along with A-1. She was giving ill
treatment and harassment to the deceased insisting her
to bring dowry amount. So far as the death notes are
concerned, it is submitted by the learned Government
Pleader, report is still awaited. Therefore, at this stage,
without expressing any opinion of this court on the
merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with liberty
to the petitioner/accused No.2 to move the concerned
court seeking her release on bail immediately after
receipt of the report from the handwriting expert.
With this observation, the petition is disposed of
for the present.
Sd/-
JUDGE