SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mohanakumara vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 July, 2019

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2884/2019

Between:

Mohanakumara
S/o. Krishne Gowda,
Aged about 42 years,
R/at Sulagodu Village,
Kundruru Hobli,
Alur Taluk,
Hassan District 573 213.
… Petitioner

(By Sri.Sharath Kumar H. N., Advocate)

And:

The State of Karnataka
Hassan Extension Police Station,
Hassan District,
Rep. by State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Building,
Bengaluru 560 001.
…Respondent
(By Sri. S. Rachaiah, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C., praying to grant regular bail in Crime No.338/2018
for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, Section302 of IPC
and Sections 3 and Section4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, by
Hassan Extension Police at Hassan on the file of the 3rd
Additional District and Sessions Judge at Hassan.
2

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

ORDER

Petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in

connection with his detention pursuant to the

proceedings in Crime No. 338/2018 for the offences

punishable under Sections 498A, Section302 of IPC and

Sections 3 and Section4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. The case of the prosecution is that a

complaint came to be lodged on 07.11.2018 alleging

commission of aforestated offence. It is alleged that the

petitioner had married the deceased and that gold and

cash were given at the time of marriage and initially

though husband and wife lived in harmony,

subsequently difference of opinion developed and it is

alleged that the accused is stated to have had an illicit

relationship with another lady. It is stated that there
3

were frequent quarrels between the petitioner and the

deceased. It is stated that on 07.11.2018 enquiry was

made near the work place of Nandini. Subsequently, on

seeing the complainant’s daughter lying dead in her

house, complaint was lodged. FIR is registered.

Investigation is complete and charge sheet has been

filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that

case rests on circumstantial evidence and the question

as regards proof of offence is a matter for trial.

4. Learned High Court Government Pleader

states that circumstantial evidence is strong and the

nature of injuries would indicate the manner in which

the deceased was done to death and opposes grant of

bail.

5. It is to be noticed that investigation is

complete and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioner is
4

in custody since 09.11.2018. The case of the

prosecution rests on circumstantial evidence. Though

the learned High Court Government Pleader states that

circumstantial evidence is strong, however, these are

matters to be proved during trial. Present proceedings

cannot be construed to be proceedings for punishment.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as regards

to the weight of evidence, petitioner is entitled to be

enlarged on bail.

6. In the result, the bail petition filed by the

petitioner under Sec. 439 of SectionCr.P.C. is allowed and the

petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No. 338/2018 for

the offences punishable under Sections 498A, Section302 of

IPC and Sections 3 and Section4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,

1961, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal
bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh
only) with one surety for the likesum to
the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

5

(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for
the expeditious disposal of the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with
evidence, influence in any way any
witness.

(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.

Any observation made herein shall not be taken as

an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

Sd/-

JUDGE

VP

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 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