SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Malkamma And Anr vs State Through Shahapur P.S. on 15 February, 2019

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.G.M.PATIL

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200138/2019

BETWEEN:
1. Malkamma W/o Sidramappa Angadi,
Age: 50 years, Occ: Household,
R/o Rastapur Village, Tq. Shahapur,
Presently R/o Mamata Colony,
Shahapur City, Dist: Yadgiri-585201.

2. Sidramappa S/o Sharanappa Angadi,
Age: 55 years, Occ: Business,
R/o Rastapur Villagbe, Tq. Shahapur,
Presently R/o Mamata Colony,
Shahapur City, Dist. Yadgiri-585201.
… Petitioners
(By Sri Basavaling Nasi, Advocate)

AND:

State through Shahapur P.S.
Represented through Addl. SPP
High Court of Karnataka
at Kalaburagi Bench.
… Respondent
(By Sri P.S.Patil, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C, praying to allow the petition and release the (accused
No.1 and 2) petitioner’s on bail in bearing Crime
2

No.485/2018 and FIR No.712/2018 of Shahapur police
station at Shahapur for the offence under Section 498A, 302
R/w Sec.34 of IPC which is pending on the file of Civil Judge
JMFC (Jr.Dn.) Court at Shahapur, in the interest of
justice.

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

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime

No.485/2018 of Shahahpur Police Station, for the

offence under Section 498(A) and 302 R/w Section 34

of IPC.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that on

22.12.2018, the complainant Adappa filed a complaint,

he has alleged in his complaint that his sister Amruta @

Amramma was given in marriage to Sharabanna Angadi

of Rastapur village in the year 2009. They have

constructed a house in Mamta Colony Shahapur by
3

taking loan amount. Since last two or three years,

accused No.1 to 4 have been harassing and ill-treating

is sister asking her to bring loan of Rs.2,00,000/- from

her parent’s house. The parents had arranged a loan of

Rs.1,00,000/- and given the same to the accused. The

accused continued to insist her to bring another

Rs.1,00,000/- loan amount from her parent’s house in

this regard she was being harassed. On 22.12.2018

Amruta called the complaint on phone and informed

that accused No.1 to 4 were assaulting her and giving

life threat as she has not brought the amount. The

complainant informed his sister that he will come and

take her back. At about 9.30 a.m., he received

telephone call with the information that Amruta has

committed suicide. The complainant went to the house

of the accused, his sister’s body was lying on a cot. He

has alleged that the accused have murdered his sister

and then hanged her. On the basis of his complaint,

the respondent-police have registered the above case
4

against accused No.1 to 4. In the course of

investigation, the petitioners-accused No.1 and 2 were

arrested on 23.12.2018 and since then they are in

judicial custody.

3. The petitioners have stated that there is no

specific allegation against them and that they have been

falsely implicated in the case. They are the parents of

the accused No.3 and 4 on the assumption they have

been implicated. The very facts goes to show that the

deceased might have committed suicide and most

probably the allegations attracts the offence under

Section 498A of IPC against the petitioners. The

petitioners are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the

deceased and they are age old suffering from old age

ailments The baby born to the deceased is also in

judicial custody with petitioner No.1 as there is nobody

to look after the baby. Looking to the age of the child
5

and further nourishment, the petitioners may be

enlarged on bail.

4. The learned High Court Government Pleader

filed a statement of objections. It is stated that the

alleged offence under Section 302 of IPC is non-bailable

and triable by the Sessions Court and is punishable

with death or imprisonment for life. There is a material

against the petitioners to show that since last 2-3 years,

the petitioners and accused No.3 and 4 were insisting

the deceased to bring an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as

loan from her parent’s house and the parents of the

deceased had arranged Rs.1,00,000/- and given to the

accused. But the accused continued to harass the

deceased insisting her to bring another Rs.1,00,000/-.

On 22.12.2018 in the morning, the deceased herself

called the complaint on phone and informed him that

the accused are assaulted her and giving life threat as

she has not brought the amount and requested him to

come and take her. Later at 9.30 a.m. the complainant
6

received telephone call from accused No.4 that Amruta

has committed suicide. Therefore, there is a clear

material as to the demand of money made by the

accused and also the PM report goes to show that the

death is due to “Asphyxia as a result of hanging”. In

that, it is the case of homicidal hanging in the house of

the matrimonial home. In case the petitioners are

released on bail, there is likelihood of tampering the

prosecution witnesses and hampering the trial and also

absconding and fleeing away from taking trial.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

and the learned High Court Government Pleader.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners

submits that, absolutely there are no allegation of any

overt act against the petitioners so for as the alleged

offence under Section 302 of IPC is concerned and at

the most the allegations in the complaint goes to show

that the offence under Section 498A of IPC is attracted
7

against the petitioners. The learned counsel further

submitted that 18 months child of the deceased is also

taken by petitioner No.1 while she was remanded to the

judicial custody, as there is nobody to look after the

said child. Therefore, the petitioners may be enlarged

on bail.

7. Per contra, the learned High Court

Government Pleader opposing the bail petition and

reiterating the statement of objections, submits that in

case the petitioners are enlarged on bail, there is a

likelihood of tampering with the prosecution witnesses

and hampering the trial and that there are common

allegations against the petitioners and accused No.3

and 4 and the death of the deceased took place in the

house of the accused-petitioners. Under these

circumstances, the bail petition may be rejected.

8. The allegation in the complaint goes to show

that the petitioners and accused No.3 and 4 were

demanding money from her parent’s house and she was
8

subjected to ill-treatment as she had not brought the

remaining amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as demanded by the

accused. So for as the alleged incident dated

22.12.2018 is concerned, it is the case of the

prosecution that the accused themselves ill-treated the

deceased and hanged her which is homicidal death. On

the other hand the petitioners have stated that the

deceased might have committed suicide. The cause of

death as stated in the PM report is due to “Asphyxia

as a result of hanging”. Admittedly, the petitioners are

parents of accused No.3 and 4 and child of the deceased

is also in the custody of petitioner No.1 in the jail. It is

stated that maternal grand parents of the child have not

come forward to take the custody of the child.

Further, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not

required, therefore, they are remanded to judicial

custody. Under these circumstances, I am of the

considered opinion that the petitioners are entitled to be

enlarged on bail on imposing necessary conditions to
9

see that they will appear before the Court regularly and

they will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following..

ORDER

Petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby
allowed.

The petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail
in Crime No.485/2018, pending on the file of Civil
Judge JMFC (Jr.Dn.) Court, Shahapur, on their
executing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- each with
two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the
committal Court on the following conditions.

1. The petitioners shall not threaten or allure
the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

2. The petitioners shall appear before the Court
regularly as and when directed.

3. The petitioners shall not leave the
jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior
permission.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SMP / RPH

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
MyNation Times Magzine


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