SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mr Muddana Venkata Ramesh vs State By Mahadevapura Police on 11 September, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4825/2018
c/w
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4826/2018

In Crl.P.No.4825/2018:

Between:

Mr. Muddana Venkata Ramesh,
S/o Satyanarayana,
Aged about 31 years,
R/o Kesanakuru Village,
Ipolavaram Mandal,
Godavari East, Kakinada,
Andra Pradesh – 630 0523. …Petitioner

(By Sri Brijesh Patil, Advocate for
Sri P.N.Hegde, Advocate)

And:

State by Mahadevapura Police,
Represented by its SPP,
High Court of Karnataka,
Bangalore – 01. …Respondent

(By Sri K.P.Yoganna, HCGP)
2

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the
event of his arrest in Cr.No.167/2018 of Mahadevapura
Police Station, Bangalore City for the offence P/U/S 498A,
304B read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act.

In Crl.P.No.4826/2018:

Between:

1. Smt. Muddana Anantha Lakshmi,
W/o Satyanarayana,
Aged about 47 years,
R/o Kesanakuru Village,
Ipolavaram Mandal,
Godavari East, Kakinada,
Andra Pradesh – 632 101.

2. Sri Galidevara Rama Jogi,
Nageshwara Rao,
S/o Venkata Narasimha Rao,
Aged about 47 years,
No.2-23, Galidevara Vari Veedi,
Cheyyeru Gunnepalli,
Mummidivaram Anathavaram,
Godavari East,
Andra Pradesh – 632 101.

3. Smt. Yalla Ammaji,
W/o Yalla Krishna,
Aged about 42 years,
No.2-259, Thillakuppa,
Panta Kallava, Godavari East,
Andra Pradesh – 632 101. …Petitioners

(By Sri Brijesh Patil, Advocate for
Sri P.N.Hegde, Advocate)
3

And:

State by Mahadevapura Police,
Represented by its SPP,
High Court of Karnataka,
Bangalore – 01. …Respondent

(By Sri K.P.Yoganna, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the
event of their arrest in Crime No.167/2018 of
Mahadevapura Police Station, Bangalore City for the
offence P/U/S 498A, 304B read with 34 of IPC and
Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act.

These Criminal Petitions coming on for orders, this
day, the Court made the following:

ORDER

Criminal Petition No.4825/2018 has been filed by

the petitioner-accused No.1 and Criminal Petition

No.4826/2018 has been filed by the petitioners-accused

Nos.2, 3 and 4 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to

enlarge them on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime

No.167/2018 of Mahadevapura Police Station,

Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections

498A, 304B read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3

and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

4

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the

petitioners and the learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

3. The brief facts of the case as per the

complaint are that the daughter of complainant, viz.,

Tulasi Mahalakshmi was given in marriage to Muddana

Venkata Ramesh (accused No.1) on 16.03.2017 and

subsequently, on 19.01.2018, she committed suicide by

hanging herself in the house of her husband and in

light of the same, a complaint was registered in UDR

No.15/2018. Thereafter, the father of deceased filed a

complaint alleging that deceased committed suicide

because of the ill-treatment and harassment caused by

the accused persons for demand of dowry. On the basis

of the said complaint, a case was registered in Crime

No.167/2018 for the above said offences.

4. It is the contention of learned counsel for the

petitioners that in the first complaint filed by the
5

brother of deceased, there are no specific allegations

with regard to demand of dowry and also any

harassment caused by the accused-petitioners to the

deceased. It is further contended that subsequently

another complaint came to be filed by the father of

deceased after two months of the alleged incident and

the said complaint is only an afterthought with an

intention to harass the accused persons. He also

contended that there is no prima facie material to

connect the accused-petitioners herein to the alleged

crime. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the

petitions and grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the respondent – State vehemently

argued and submitted that in the complaint filed by the

father of deceased, there are specific allegations of

demand of dowry, ill-treatment and harassment caused

to the deceased by the accused petitioners herein and
6

even the witnesses have categorically deposed the

ill-treatment and harassment caused by the accused

petitioners to the deceased. He further submitted that

admittedly, the death of Tulasi Mahalakshmi has taken

place in the house of her husband within a year of

marriage and hence, there is a presumption that if

death has taken place within seven years of marriage, it

is to be presumed as dowry death. He submits that the

investigation is not yet complete and that accused-

petitioners are absconding and are not available for

investigation and hence, if they are enlarged on bail,

they may abscond and may not be available for

investigation and may also tamper the prosecution

evidence. On these grounds, he prayed for dismissal of

these petitions.

6. I have carefully and consciously gone

through the contents of complaint and other materials

produced alongwith the petitions. By going through the
7

contents of complaint and other materials, it is seen

that insofar as accused Nos.3 and 4 are concerned, it

indicates that they were not residing in the said house,

but they used to come as visitors and at that time, they

used to ill-treat and harass the deceased for demand of

dowry. Insofar as accused Nos.1 and 2 are concerned,

it indicates that they were residing together. That the

investigation is still pending and that it is a specific case

of learned Government Pleader that the accused

persons are absconding and are not available for

investigation and still investigation is not yet complete

and hence, under these circumstances, without

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and

that death has taken place within seven years of

marriage. Under these circumstances and without

complete records, it is not possible to appreciate the

submissions which have been made by learned counsel

for the petitioners.

8

7. In the light of the above, Crl.P.No.4825/2018

filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 (Sri Muddana

Venkata Ramesh) is dismissed.

8. In so far as Crl.P.No.4826/2018 is

concerned, the petition stands dismissed in respect of

petitioner No.1 [Smt.Muddana Anantha Lakshmi

(accused No.2)] and in respect of petitioner Nos.2 and 3

(Galidevara Rama Jogi (accused No.3) and Smt.Yalla

Ammaji (accused No.4)], the petition is allowed and are

granted anticipatory bail. In the event of their arrest in

Crime No.167/2018, the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 in

Crl.P.No.4826/2018 herein are ordered to be released,

subject to the following conditions:-

i) Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 (accused Nos.3 and 4)
shall execute personal bond for
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each
with two sureties for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the Investigating Agency.

9

ii) They shall surrender before the Investigating
Agency within fifteen days from the date of
receipt of a certified copy of this order.

iii) They shall co-operate with the Investigating
Agency and they must appear as and when
they are required for investigation.

iv) They shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence in any manner.

v) They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the
trial Court without prior permission.

vi) They shall mark their attendance Saturday
of every fortnight between 10.00 a.m. and
5.00 p.m. without fail.

9. However, the petitioner (accused No.1) in

Crl.P.No.4825/2018 and petitioner No.1 (accused No.2)

in Crl.P.No.4826/2018 are granted liberty to file fresh

bail application after the filing of charge sheet.

Sd/-

JUDGE

VGR
ct:am

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