SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mr Mastan Vali D vs The State By Channamanakere Achu … on 17 July, 2019

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2019

BEFORE

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

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4492/2019

Between:

Mr. Mastan Vali D.,
Son of Mohammed D.,
Aged about 30 years,
Residing at No.36, 1st Floor,
10th Cross, Balajinagara,
Ittamadu,
BSK 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru – 560 085. … Petitioner

(By Sri A.V. Ramakrishna, Advocate)

And:

The State by Channamanakere
Achu Kattu Police Station,
Rep. by State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Building,
Bengaluru – 560 001. … Respondent

(By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the
Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.
No.93/2019 of Channammanakere Achu Kattu Police
Station, Bengaluru City for the offences p/u/s 3 and 4 of
D.P. Act and Sections 304B and Section498A of IPC.
2

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

ORDER

The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in

connection with his detention pursuant to the

proceedings in Crime No.93/2019 for the offences

punishable under Sections 498-A and Section304-B of IPC and

Sections 3 and Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the father

of the victim on 14.04.2019 has filed a complaint

alleging that his daughter was given in marriage to the

petitioner and was harassed for dowry and unable to

bear the harassment, the petitioner had committed

suicide

3. The case that is made out in the complaint is

that the petitioner and the victim had entered into the

wedlock on 22.04.2018 and that at the time of marriage

cash and gold ornaments were given. It is further stated

that the accused used to harass the victim stating that
3

the dowry as promised at the time of marriage was

required to be given. It comes out in the complaint that

the alleged harassment continued and eventually on

14.04.2019 the victim had committed suicide by

hanging.

4. It is noticed that the investigation is

complete and charge sheet has been filed. The

petitioner is in custody since 16.4.2019. Admittedly,

after custodial interrogation and on the basis of

investigation, the charge sheet has been filed. The proof

of offence is a matter for trial. The question as to

whether there was harassment by the accused and such

harassment led the deceased to commit suicide is a

matter to be proved during trial. The present

proceedings cannot be construed to be punitive in

nature.

5. It is noted that the Sessions Court had

rejected the application by observing that prima facie
4

case was made out and also that there was chance of

tampering with the prosecution witnesses. However, it

is rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the

petitioner that the victim is native of Andhra Pradesh

and witnesses are also native of Andhra Pradesh while

the petitioner is a resident of Bengaluru and hence, the

apprehension of tampering of witnesses could be taken

care of by imposing appropriate conditions.

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

petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and

the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.93/2019

for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and

Section304-B of IPC and Sections 3 and Section4 of 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

VGR

Leave a Reply

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

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