SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Giridhara vs State Of Karnataka on 23 August, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4877/2018

BETWEEN:

1. Giridhara
S/o Halappanaik,
Aged about 32 years,
Agriculturist.

2. Halappanaik
S/o Bhimanaik,
Aged about 63 years,
Agriculturist.

3. Lalitabai
W/o Halappanaik,
Aged about 55 years,

All are residing at
Chikkabasura (Vijayapura) tanda,
Honnali Taluk,
Davanagere District – 577 224.
…Petitioners
(By Sri S.V.Bhojaraja, Advocate)

AND

State of Karnataka,
By Honnali Police,
Davanagere District – 577217.
2

By S.P.P High Court of Karnataka,
Bengaluru – 01.
…Respondent
(By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in
Crime No.15/2018 of Honnali Police Station,
Davanagere District for the Offences punishable under
Sections 498A, 323, 324, 307, 504 read with 34 of IPC
and Sections 3 and 4 of DP Act.

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

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for petitioners’ and the

learned High Court Government Pleader.

2. FIR was registered in Crime No.15/2018

against all the petitioners in relation to the offences

punishable under Sections 498(A), 504, 307, 323, 324

read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act, 1961.

3. The complaint was made by the wife of first

petitioner stating that her marriage with the first
3

petitioner took place about five or six years ago and in

the wedlock, three children were born. The allegations

are that the petitioners pledged the jewellery of the

complainant in a bank to borrow money. Whenever the

complainant asked the petitioners to repay the loan and

bring back the jewellery, they all started harassing her

by abusing and beating her. Thereafter, they also

started demanding her to bring some more dowry from

her parents house and in that connection, they started

beating her with stick. On 17.07.2018, when the

complainant requested the petitioners to bring back her

jewellery from the bank, they took up quarrel with her.

The first petitioner poured kerosene on her body and lit

fire. She came out of the house and jumped into water

filled drum and thus the fire came to be doused. She

was taken to hospital at Shivamogga, but on the advice

of Doctor at Mcggon Hospital, Shivamogga, she was

taken to Manipal Hospital, Mangaluru. Thereafter, she

was shifted to Venlock Hospital, Mangaluru. As all the
4

beds were occupied by patients, in the said hospital, she

was shifted to Father Muller Hospital. In this Hospital,

she made a statement before the Police, on the basis of

which, FIR was registered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners tries to

argue that the complainant was not residing with the

petitioners. He submits that boundaries mentioned in

the spot mahazar are wrong. The Police intentionally

gave wrong boundaries in the mahazar to show that the

incident took place in the house of the petitioners. But

the petitioners have produced another document, which

shows the correct boundaries and therefore, it can be

said very well that incident did not take place in the

house of the petitioners. It is his another point of

argument that the complainant caught the fire

accidentally. He further submits that petitioner Nos.2

and 3 are aged and without any basis, they have been

falsely implicated.

5

5. Learned High Court Government Pleader

opposes the grant of bail. The complaint came to be

registered on the statement made by the wife of first

petitioner. The medical report shows burn injuries. An

attempt was made by the petitioners to kill her. There

are prima-facie materials against the petitioners and

therefore, bail cannot be granted.

6. If the complaint is read, the specific overt act

of setting fire to the complainant is against the first

petitioner, who is none other than her husband. The

medical report also shows burn injuries sustained by

the complainant. If the correct boundaries are not

mentioned in the mahazar and the place of incident is

disputable, the petitioners can question the

Investigating Officer during the trial. This aspect cannot

be given any importance now. As of now there are prima

facie materials against the first petitioner. Investigation

is completed. It also shows that prima-facie materials
6

are available against all the petitioners. But, petitioner

Nos.2 and 3 are aged. The specific overt act of setting

fire is against the first petitioner only. In these

circumstances, I am of the opinion that the first

petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. However,

petitioner Nos.2 and 3 can be released on bail. Hence,

the following:

ORDER

(1) Petition stands dismissed as
against the first petitioner.

(2) Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are
ordered to be released on bail in connection
with Crime No.15/2018 registered by
Honnali Police Station, Davanagere District
subject to each of them on executing a bond
for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One
Lakh only) and providing two sureties for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
They are also subjected to following
conditions:

i. They shall not tamper with the evidence
collected by the investigating officer.

7

ii. They shall not directly or indirectly
threaten the witnesses.

iii. They shall regularly appear before the
Court for trial, without fail.

Sd/-

JUDGE

NS/nms

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