IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JULY, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4102/2019
BETWEEN:
1. Krishna Kumari,
W/o Rama Krishna Mohan,
Aged about 60 years,
R/at No.G6,
Sparrow Wings Apartment,
Indira Gandhi Street, 5th Main,
Uday Nagar II Stage,
A Narayanapura,
Bangalore – 560 016.
2. Yamini Saraswathi,
W/o Pamarathi Dinesh,
D/o Rama Krishna Mohan,
Aged about 36 years,
R/at No.8, Ramanjunappa Layout,
4th Cross, MEG Layout,
B. Narayanapura,
Bengaluru – 560 016. … Petitioners
(By Sri Hashmath Pasha, Senior Advocate for
Sri Kaleem Sabir, Advocate)
AND:
State of Karnataka by
Mahadevapura Police Station,
2
Bengaluru – 560 006
(Represented by Learned
State Public Prosecutor)
Bengaluru – 560 001. … Respondent
(By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to enlarge the
petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime
No.173/2019 of Mahadevapura Police Station,
Bangalore for the offences p/u/s 498A, 304B r/w 34 of
SectionIPC and Sections 3, 4 of D.P. Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The petitioners are seeking to be enlarged on bail
in the event of their arrest pursuant to the proceedings
in Crime No.173/2019 for the offences under Sections
498-A, Section304-B r/w 34 SectionIPC and Sections 3 and Section4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. The petitioner no.1/accused no.2 is the
mother-in-law of the deceased and petitioner no.2/
accused no.3 is the sister-in-law of the deceased.
3
3. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased
Raavi Jaya Madhavi was married to accused no.1 –
Venkata Subramanya who was working as a Software
Engineer in IBM, Bangalore. It is stated that there was
demand for dowry at the time of marriage. It is further
stated that accused no.1 and the deceased settled down
in Bangalore and were residing in Bangalore after
March, 2018. It is further stated that certain differences
of opinion crept up amongst the spouses. On the
intervening night of 13/14.04.2019, at about 1.17 a.m.,
information was received from the mother-in-law of the
deceased that the deceased died after having hanged
herself to the ceiling fan. A complaint was lodged, FIR
was registered and investigation is in progress.
4. Sri. Hashmath Pasha, learned Senior Counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners contends that
admittedly, accused no.3 was a software engineer
married and staying separately at B. Narayanapura and
4
was not residing with accused no.1. He further submits
that as regards accused no.2, it is stated that accused
no.2 was a permanent resident of Andhra Pradesh and
residing in West Godavari District. It is contended that
the reasons for difference of opinion also appears to be
alleged relationship between the deceased and one
Chandrashekar. The mother of the deceased had filed a
complaint and FIR has been registered on 12.10.2018,
which is self-explanatory. It is contended that in view of
the fact that both accused nos.2 and 3 were residing
separately, story has been created to include them
falsely in this case.
5. Looking into the factual matrix and noticing
that accused no.1 who is the husband of the deceased
is in custody and subjected himself to custodial
interrogation and also noting that petitioner
no.2/accused no.3 is a software engineer and staying
separately with her husband and that petitioner
5
no.1/acused no.2, the mother-in-law of the deceased
was also a permanent resident of West Godavari District
and is aged about 60 years, no case is made out for
custodial interrogation of the present petitioners.
Needless to state that co-operation with the
investigation would be ensured by imposing stringent
conditions.
6. In the result, the bail petition filed by the
petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and
the petitioner is enlarged on bail in the event of his
arrest in Crime No.173/2019 for the offences under
Sections 498-A, Section304-B r/w 34 SectionIPC and Sections 3 and Section4
of the Dowry Prohibition Act subject to the following
conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall appear in person
before the Investigating Officer in
connection with Crime No.173/2019
within 15 days from the date of release
of the order and shall execute a
6personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) each with a surety
for the likesum to the satisfaction of the
Investigating Officer.
(ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with
evidence, influence in any way, any
witness.
(iii) The petitioners shall physically present
themselves and mark their attendance
before the concerned Station House
Officer/s once in a week between
10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of
the final report.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the
petitioner to inform the same to the
concerned SHO.
(v) Any violation of the aforementioned
conditions by the petitioner, shall
result in cancellation of bail.
7
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as
an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
No order is called for with respect to
I.A.No.1/2019 in the light of disposing of the petition,
accordingly the said application is disposed of as having
being rendered redundant.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Np/-
