Karnataka High Court Gangamma Rudrappa Mallannavar vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 December, 2013Author: Jawad Rahim

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013 BEFORE

THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11612/2013 C/w.

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11613/2013 BETWEEN:

Gangamma

W/o. Rudrappa Mallannavar

Age: 65 years, Occ: Household work R/o. Marihaal, Tal. & Dist: Belgaum … PETITIONER

(IN CRL.P.NO.11612/2013)

Patreppa

S/o. Rudrappa Mallannavar

Age: 27 years, Occ: Private Service R/o. Marihaal, Tal. & Dist: Belgaum … PETITIONER

(IN CRL.P.NO.11613/2013)

(By Sri. Jagadish Patil, Advocate) AND:

The State of Karnataka

Marihal Police Station

R/by its Special Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bench

At: Dharwad

… RESPONDENT

(COMMON)

(By Sri. V. M. Banakar, Addl. SPP) 2

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11612/2013 IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN MARIHAL POLICE STATION CRIME NO.223/2013 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498(A), 306 R/W. SECTION 34 OF THE IPC.

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11613/2013 IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN MARIHAL POLICE STATION CRIME NO.223/2013 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498(A), 306 R/W. SECTION 34 OF THE IPC.

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: COMMON ORDER

These two petitions are by the accused Nos. 1 and 2 facing charge for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the IPC, which is under investigation in Crime No.223/2013.

2. The petitioner in Crl.P.No.11612/2013 is the second accused – Gangamma Rudrappa Mallannavar, who seeks direction to the Investigating Officer to release her in the event of arrest, while Crl.P.No.11613/2013 is by the first accused – Patreppa 3

Rudrappa Mallannavar, who seeks release from judicial custody.

3. Heard Sri. Jagadish Patil, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. V. M. Banakar, learned Addl. SPP for the respondent-State and perused the records.

4. The prosecution has indicted the petitioners for a principal charge under Section 306 of the IPC on the basis of the report of one Chandrappa Basalingappa Tubaki, father of the victim girl Manjula, in which he alleged that his daughter was married by him to the first accused about three years ago and she entered matrimony with him, but was treated cruelly by the husband Patreppa and his mother Gangamma. The harassment continued ceaselessly, consequent to which his daughter committed suicide on 16.10.2013 hanging herself. Based on the report, first accused husband – Patreppa was arrested and is in judicial custody after his bail plea was rejected by the trial Court, while his 4

mother, who is the second accused has still not been arrested.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend, Manjula since deceased, was married to the first accused in a mass marriage without there being any demand for dowry or other claims. The petitioners herein did all that was possible to make the marriage life successfully, but Manjula was not happy and they also did not know the reason why she took that extreme step of suicide. The learned counsel refers to the statement in the complaint, where there is no mention of any incident, consequent of which such unfortunate incident occurred.

6. The learned Addl. SPP Sri. Banakar would submit, the fact that the death has occurred within three years of marriage would speak of miserable life she led and investigation is still under progress and grant of bail 5

to the first accused and anticipatory bail to the second accused is not desirable.

7. However, as rightly alleged by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the statement in the complaint refers only an unfortunate incident of suicide by the victim and there is no narration of facts revealing any harassment in the past and what transpired from the date of marriage till her death. The general submission is made of cruelty, which at this juncture is under investigation by the police officer. The first accused has been interrogated and on the report of the police officer that they do not require him for further interrogation, he is now confined in judicial custody. As regards the second accused Gangamma is concerned, she is said to be aged 65 years and a senior citizen and as there is no allegation against her except general statement, I am of the opinion both the petitioners could be trusted with the order sought for. 6

ORDER

Criminal Petition No.11612/2013 is allowed subject to the following conditions:

i. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer, in-charge of investigation in Crime No.223/2013, within three weeks from now. On her appearance, the Investigating Officer may arrest her, but she shall be released if she executes a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety for a like sum.

i. She shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and submit herself for interrogation and shall cause no impediment in the process of recovery, if it is to be effected.

ii. She shall not tamper with the prosecution material or prevail upon the witnesses by any means.

iii. She shall not leave the Sessions Jurisdiction without permission of the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate.

7

Criminal Petition No.11613/2013 is allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail subject to following conditions:

i. Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

ii. He shall not tamper the prosecution material or prevail upon witnesses by any means. iii. He shall not leave the Sessions jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission. Sd/-

JUDGE

gab/-