IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9645/2018
BETWEEN:
Mohammed Samiulla
S/o Mohammed Anwar,
Aged about 34 years,
Occ: Proprietor,
M/s Inosys Technologies,
R/at # 18/1, 3rd Main,
15th Cross, Lakkasandra,
Bengaluru – 560 030.
…Petitioner
(By Sri C.H. Jadhav, Senior counsel for
Sri. K. Ram Singh, Advocate)
AND:
State of Karnataka by
Adugodi Police Station,
Bengaluru – 560 030.
Rep. by Government Pleader,
High Court of Karnataka,
Bengaluru – 560 001. … Respondent
(By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime
No.272/2018 of Adugodi Police Station, Bengaluru for
-2-
the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302
of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the
petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.,
seeking his release on bail in Crime No.272/2018 of
Adugodi Police Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 498A and 302 of IPC.
2. I have heard Sri. C.H. Jadhav, learned
Senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri.M. Divakar
Maddur, learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent-State.
3. Gist of the complaint is that the daughter of
the complainant got married with the accused on
07.09.2017. Thereafter, they were residing at Shoba
Apartments, Bannerghatta. As the character of the
petitioner was not good, there was quarrel between the
-3-
daughter of the complainant and the accused petitioner.
It is further alleged that the complainant came to know
the fact that earlier, the petitioner got married
subsequently, obtained divorce and thereafter, got
married to the complainant’s daughter. It is further
alleged that the complainant and his family members
were restrained from visiting the house of the petitioner
and also restrained from calling the daughter of the
complainant and there was ill-treatment and
harassment. The said factor was pacified by the elder
members. It is further alleged that after 40 days i.e., on
27.10.2018 at about 5.30 p.m., the accused petitioner
intentionally pushed the deceased from second floor.
Due to the injuries, the deceased succumbed to death
on the same day at about 8.25 p.m., at Victoria
Hospital. On the basis of the complaint, a case came to
be registered.
-4-
4. It is the submission of the learned Senior
counsel for the petitioner that the complaint filed on
28.10.2018, does not make any allegation either
demand of dowry or ill-treatment and harassment. Even
though there is some allegation, the allegation is only
minor and an altercation has taken place, which will
take place in the family. It is further submitted that
when the Tahsildar has recorded the unnatural death
therein in question No.27, he has mentioned that there
is no suspicion for having committed the crime and
there is no suspicion against anybody. It is submitted
that after two days of the incident, the voluntary
statement has been recorded and the complaint has
been registered stating a new story that the accused
pushed the deceased and committed the murder of the
deceased. It is further submitted that the voluntary
statement of the accused petitioner clearly go to show
that it is an accidental death and the accused petitioner
is nothing to do with the same and he was not having
-5-
any intention or he is not involved in the alleged crime.
Immediately he has informed the parents and took the
injured to the hospital. The said conduct clearly goes to
show that the accused was not the person who has
caused the said act. He is ready to abide by the
conditions imposed on him by this Court and ready to
offer the surety. On these grounds, he prayed to allow
the petition and to release the petitioner/accused on
bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the
statement of Smt. Shaheena Taj and Bibi Ameena and
other witnesses clearly go to show that on 16.09.2018
the accused had ill-treated and harassed. It is further
submitted that there was sufficient material to show
that everyday he used to harass the deceased both
physically and mentally and unnecessarily he used to
quarrel with the deceased. In that context, he took the
-6-
accused to the second floor and from there he pushed
with an intention to kill her. As a result of the injuries,
the deceased succumbed to death. The said act clearly
goes to show that the accused with an intention to
cause the death of the deceased, has pushed her from
the second floor and the said offence is punishable with
death or imprisonment for life. He further submitted
that there is consistency in the statement of the
deceased and the neighbors. On these grounds, he
prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through
the submissions made by both the learned counsel
appearing for the parties and during the course of
arguments, the charge sheet material was also made
available and I have carefully and cautiously gone
through the charge sheet materials.
7. As could be seen from the contents of the
complaint, it indicates that the complaint has been filed
-7-
on 28.10.2018 there is no other allegation to show that
there was demand of dowry and the other materials
indicates that there is one word that the minor
altercation has taken place between the husband and
wife and they also advised in this behalf. Even as could
be seen from the said compliant, the compliant has filed
only with a suspicion against the accused petitioner and
while filing the complaint, it is not stated that it is the
petitioner, who pushed the deceased from second floor
and caused the injuries with an intention to kill her.
Even the statement which has been recorded by the
Tahsildar therein, it is only suspicion has been
expressed. On scrutiny of the entire charge sheet
material in indicates that it is only on the basis of
suspicion the said complaint has been registered. If
really there was an ill-treatment and harassment as
contended, immediately when they received the phone
call at about 5.30 p.m., they would have lodged a
compliant against him. But the complaint was lodged
-8-
at about 10.50 p.m. on the same day, but the said
allegations have not been made in this behalf. Looking
from any angle there is only suspicion about the case,
whether it is an accidental death or an intentional
death? The said fact has to be considered and
appreciated only at the time of trial but not at this pre-
mature stage. Already the charge sheet has been filed
and the custodial continuation of the petitioner is not
necessary. The trial may take some more time. In that
light, I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions,
if the accused petitioner is ordered to be released on
bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice. In the light
of discussions held by me above, petition is allowed.
8. Petitioner/accused is enlarged on bail in
Crime No.272/2018 of Adugodi Police Station for the
offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of
IPC subject to the following conditions:
-9-
1. Petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond
for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs
only) with two sureties for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court
without prior permission.
3. He shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e.,
1st of every month between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00
p.m., before the jurisdictional police station, till
the trial is concluded.
4. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence
directly or indirectly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VBS