SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ekambaram Singh vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 September, 2019








Ekambaram Singh
Son of Anantharamm Singh
Aged about 33 years
R/at No.370, 4th Cross,
Andrahalli Main Road,
Vishwa Needam Post,
Bengaluru-560 091
(By Sri.Siji Mulagil, Advocate for
Sri.P.Naveen Kumar, Advocate)


The State of Karnataka
By BEML Nagar Police Station,
KGF, Rep by its Government Pleader
High Court Complex,
Bangalore-560 001.
(By Sri.Honnappa, 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.22/2019 of BEML Nagar, P.S., KGF
for the offence p/u/s 498A, 304B, 504 read with Section
149 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of DP Act.

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


Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the


2. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 in Crime

No.22/2019 of BEML Nagar Police Station, for the offence

punishable under Sections 498A, Section304B, Section504 read with

Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3 and Section4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act. The other accused persons granted with

anticipatory bail by the Sessions Judge in

Crl.Misc.Nos.295/2019 and 301/2019 except this


3. There is no dispute that the deceased-Nandini

Bai was given in marriage to the petitioner and their

marriage took place on 02.11.2016. For long years

deceased did not beget any child. In this background it is

alleged that accused persons were ill-treating and

harassing her and named as sterilized lady as she did not

beget any child. It is said that deceased has been brought

to her parental house on 11.05.2019 and since then she

started residing in her parental house. It is alleged that on

11.05.2019 there was some compromise but in spite of that

the petitioner did not take her back to his home. In the

above said background, it is alleged that on 15.05.2019

deceased committed suicide in her parental house and

thereafter, a complaint came to be lodged against petitioner

and other accused persons.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought

to the notice of this court that deceased was suffering from

Mocobac Bacherium Tuberculosis and she has been treated

for the same on regular basis. Further added to the above

facts, there are no materials at this stage to show that what

transpired between 11.05.2019 to 15.09.2015 in the

parental house of the deceased and why she actually

committed suicide. what transpired in these four days is

the main aspect that has to be established by the trial

Court while dealing with the matters like this. Therefore,

under the above said circumstances, the allegations are

similar and in fact, the allegations against other accused

persons are more and that they were threatening the

deceased with dire consequences of performing second

marriage to the petitioner.

5. Under the above said circumstances, merely

because serious offences are invoked under SectionIPC and SectionDowry

Prohibition Act, it does not mean that the hands of the

Court are tied in granting the bail. There are no materials

to show regarding ill-treatment and harassment, it has to

be established during the course of full fledged trial.

Therefore, petitioner is entitled for grant of anticipatory

bail. Hence, the following:


The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner

shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in

connection with Crime No.22/2019 of BEML Nagar Police

Station, subject to the following conditions:-

i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the
Investigating Officer within Ten days from the date
of receipt of a certified copy of this order and he
shall execute his personal bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like-sum to
the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating

ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the
investigation or tampering the prosecution

iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the
Investigating Officer to complete the investigation,
and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer
as and when called for.

iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of
Investigating Officer without prior permission, till
the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three
months whichever is earlier.

v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a
week i.e, on every Sunday between 10.00 am and
5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a
period of two months or till the charge sheet is
filed, whichever is earlier.



Leave a Reply

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

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