SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mr. Krishna Murthy A T vs State Of Karnataka on 9 July, 2019

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2019

BEFORE

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

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3601/2019
Between:

1. Mr. Krishna Murthy A. T
S/o. Late Thammanna Gowda
Aged about 31 years

2. Smt. Devamma
W/o. Late Thammanna Gowda
Aged about 62 years

Both are residing at
Lakshmi Nilaya
R/at 188/2, 4th Cross,
5th Block, Bhuvaneshwarinagar,
Bangalore.
Permanent residents of
Mallipattana Hobli,
Arakalgudu Taluk,
Hassan District 573 102. … Petitioners

(By Sri. Gopi K. J., Advocate)

And:

State of Karnataka
By Arakalagudu Police,
Rep. by Public Prosecutor,
High Court Building,
Bangalore 560 001. … Respondent
(By Sri. K. P. Yoganna, HCGP)
2

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C., praying to release the accused/petitioners on bail in
the event of their arrest by Arakalagudu Police in Crime
No.90/2019 for the alleged offence punishable under
Sections 498-A, Section323, Section342, Section504, Section506 read with Section 34 of
IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act, pending on the file
of the Principal Civil Judge JMFC, Arakalagudu.

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.90/2019 for the offences punishable under

Sections 498A, Section323, Section342, Section504, Section506 and Section34 of IPC and

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

2. The case of the prosecution is that the

petitioner No.1 had married the complainant on

9.5.2016 and it is alleged that at the time of marriage,

gold and cash was given and all expenses were borne by

the complainant’s family. It is stated that subsequently

there were differences of opinion that cropped up in the

matrimonial relationship and the complainant alleges
3

that there was harassment to bring the dowry. After the

complaint was lodged, FIR has been registered and

investigation is in progress.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners

points out that on an earlier occasion, the petitioner

No.1 had lodged a complaint on 17.05.2019 regarding

an altercation that had taken place. At that point of

time, it is stated that both petitioner No.1 and the

complainant were counselled and the complainant went

with the petitioner. Subsequently, the complainant has

gone back to her parent’s house and lodged a complaint

regarding dowry harassment.

4. It is noticed that there is apparent difference

of opinion in the matrimonial relationship. The

petitioner is stated to be a Manager in a Private

Company. The petitioner No.2 is the mother-in-law of

the complainant.

4

5. Looking into the nature of offences and

noticing that there was a complaint previously lodged by

the petitioner No.1 himself, prima facie it appears that

there are differences in the matrimonial relationship.

6. In light of the submission that petitioner

No.1 has subjected himself to investigation, the facts do

make out a case for custodial interrogation of the

petitioners. It is to be noticed that the petitioner No.2 is

a lady and aged about 62 years. Hence, the petitioners

are entitled to be enlarged on bail, subject to conditions.

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

petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and

the petitioners are enlarged on bail in the event of their

arrest in Crime No.90/2019 for the offences punishable

under Sections 498A, Section323, Section342, Section504, Section506 and Section34 of IPC

and Sections 3 and Section4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,

1961, subject to the following conditions:-
5

(i) The petitioners shall appear in person
before the Investigating Officer in
connection with Crime No.90/2019
within 15 days from the date of release
of the order and shall execute personal
bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees
One Lakh only) each with 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 once in a week between 10.00
a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the
final report.

(iv) The petitioners shall co-operate with
further investigation by appearing
before the Investigating Officer as and
when they are called upon.

6

(v) In the event of change of address, the
petitioners to inform the same to the
concerned SHO.

(vi) Any violation of the aforementioned
conditions by the petitioners, 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

VGR

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

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