IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1103/2018
S/O ALI K.A.,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT HODAVADA VILLAGE,
KODAGU DISTRICT-571 223.
(BY SRI D.P.PRASANNA, ADVOCATE)
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY NAPOKLU POLICE,
REP. BY SPP,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
(BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C.
PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.160/2017 OF NAPOKLU P.S., KODAGU DISTRICT
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 313 R/W 34 OF IPC AND
SEC.3, 4 OF D.P ACT.
THIS CRL.P.COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
This is a petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.160/2017
registered by the respondent-Police in relation to
offences punishable under Sections 498A and 313 read
with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Heard the petitioner’s counsel and learned High
Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The petitioner’s wife Raziya Begum K.Y made a
complaint about physical and mental torture on her by
the petitioner and his family members. She alleged that,
she was forced to take some tablets to see that her
pregnancy would be aborted. She also made another
allegation that she was forced to bring Rs.15,00,000/-
from her parents house.
4. The petitioner’s counsel submits that there were
some differences between the husband and wife and
they approached local Juma Masjid for conciliation. The
conciliation did not take place and all efforts of the
elders to bring them together failed. On 6.10.2017, the
petitioner got issued a legal notice to the complainant
disclosing his intention to take divorce from her. In para
4 of this notice, it is clearly stated that the complainant
herself got her pregnancy terminated. Therefore, in view
of this notice, it can be said that there are false
allegations against the petitioner. It is also seen that the
complaint was made after notice was issued to her.
Charge sheet is filed and therefore, the petitioner can be
released on bail.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader for the
respondent-State opposes the grant of bail.
6. The petitioner’s notice to the complainant was
issued on 6.10.2017. The charge sheet discloses that
the complaint was made on 23.11.2017. Therefore,
truth in the allegations made in the complaint against
the petitioner have to be proved before the Court. More
over, investigation is completed and the presence of the
petitioner is no longer necessary for any purpose.
Therefore, petition can be allowed. Hence, the following
Petition is allowed,
The petitioner shall be released on bail in
connection with Crime No.160/2017 registered by
respondent-Police on his executing a bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one
surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial
Court. The petitioner is subjected to the following
(i) He shall attend the Court regularly on
all hearing dates;
(ii) He shall not threaten the witnesses
and tamper with the prosecution