SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dr.Girish Bhardwaj vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 April, 2014

Karnataka High Court Dr.Girish Bhardwaj vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 April, 2014Author: Budihal R.B.

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2014 BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B CRIMINAL PETITION NO.932/2014

BETWEEN:

Dr. Girish Bhardwaj,

S/o. Dr. Shrinivas Vyas,

Aged about 32 years,

R/a. New India Apartments,

Plot No.6, Sector-9, Rohini,

Delhi 110 085. .. PETITIONER (By Sri. M.S. Nagaraja, Adv.)

AND:

The State of Karnataka,

By Inspector of Police,

Basavanagudi Women’s Police Station, Bangalore-560004.

Rep. by SPP,

High Court of Karnataka. .. RESPONDENT (By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr. No.87/2010 of Basavanagudi Women’s P.S., Bangalore, for the offences P/U/S 498A read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 2

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 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 alleged offences punishable under Sections 498A r/w Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered in respondent-police station Crime No.87/2010.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.1 and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. I have also perused the averments made in the bail petition, complaint, FIR, order passed by the lower Court on the bail petition and other materials on record. 3

3. Looking to the averments made in the complaint it is mentioned that the marriage of the complainant with the present petitioner was performed on 14.2.2009 at New Delhi and thereafter, she had been to petitioner’s house to lead marital life. It is further alleged that at the time of marriage, the parents of the complainant expended Rs.15 lakhs towards marriage expenses at New Delhi including various functions and in spite of that petitioner and other family members started giving ill-treatment to the complainant insisting her to bring some more dowry amount. It is also alleged that when she was complaining about the stomach pain and informed the same to her mother-in-law she has not taken any care of the complainant. In connection with additional dowry amount, she was sent to her parents’ place. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed.

4. It is the contention of the petitioner that after filing the charge sheet since he is residing at Delhi no 4

summons were served on him and thereafter, the Court has issued NBW. In the bail petition it is contended that he is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by the Court. The offences alleged under Section 498A of IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are triable by the Magistrate Court and are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The apprehension of the prosecution that if bail is granted again he will abscond and put hurdles in the trial of the case for which, stringent conditions can be imposed to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Looking to the materials on record, I am of the opinion that petitioner can be admitted to bail by imposing stringent conditions.

5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to release the petitioner- accused No.1 on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Section 498A r/w Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the 5

Dowry Prohibition Act registered in respondent-police station Crime No.87/2010, subject to the following conditions:

(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- and furnish one solvent local surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate Court.

(ii) He shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

(iii) He shall make himself available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for.

(iv) He shall appear before the concerned Magistrate Court within 30 days from the date of this order and shall execute personal bond and also surety bond. Sd/-

JUDGE

bkp

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation