SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Nalla Rajaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 March, 2020

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5th DAY OF MARCH, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.913/2020

BETWEEN:

1. NALLA RAJAIAH,
S/O NALLA MALLAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

2. SMT.NALLA KANAKAMMA,
W/O NALLA RAJAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

3. NALLA RAJESH,
S/O RAJAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

ALL RESIDING AT NO.15-1,
SUBASNAGAR,
RAMAKRISHNA PUBLIC SCHOOL,
CCC NASPUR,
MANCHERIAL COAL
CHEMICAL COMPLEX,
ADILABAD,
TELANGANA 504 302. ..PETITIONERS

(BY SRI A.S.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

AND

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KONANAKUNTE POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU 560 062
2

REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU 560 001. .. RESPONDENT

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, 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.278/2019 OF KONANAKUNTE
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 498A, 304B READ WITH 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3
AND 4 OF THE D.P. ACT.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

learned High Court Government Pleader for the State.

Perused the materials on record.

2. The petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.2

to 4 in Crime No.278/2019 on the file of the II

Additional CMM Court, Bengaluru.

3. The brief allegations are that the complainant

Jagannathan, resident of Jangampalli, Kareemnagar

District, Telangana has alleged that his second daughter
3

by name Swapna was given in marriage to accused No.1

– Srinivas who is none other than the son of first and

second petitioners. The third petitioner is the brother of

accused No.1. It is alleged that prior to marriage, there

was demand of dowry, due to which cash of

Rs.5,00,000/-, some gold articles and house hold

articles worth Rs.20,000/- were given to the bride and

bride groom. After the marriage, the husband and wife

went to Hyderabad where accused No.1 was working. It

is alleged that the petitioners were also visiting

Hyderabad and they were telling the deceased to go and

bring further dowry amount of Rs.4,00,000/- from her

parental house. In fact it is alleged that an amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- was given at one instance.

4. It is the further case of the prosecution that about

one and a half years prior to the incident, the accused

No.1 – Srinivas and the deceased came over to

Bengaluru and they started residing at Hariharnagar. It
4

is specifically alleged that after they came to Bengaluru,

accused No.1 was demanding dowry and in that

context, on 06.10.2019 the deceased was sent to her

parental house demanding a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- by

accused No.1. In fact accused No.1 also had been to the

house of parents of the deceased where they advised

him. On their advice, he took the deceased back with

him on 08.10.2019. Thereafter on 14.10.2019 the

deceased has committed suicide by hanging herself in

the house of accused No.1.

5. On perusal of the above said allegations, there

is no material at this stage to show that after accused

No.1 and deceased shifted to Bengaluru, whether the

petitioners at any point in time visited the house of

accused No.1 and demanded any money from the

deceased or there was any ill-treatment and harassment

by them. Therefore, the prosecution has to establish

that there was ill-treatment and harassment soon before
5

the death for demand of dowry so as to attract Section

304B of IPC. At this stage, considering the above said

facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion

that the petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on

anticipatory bail with certain stringent conditions.

Hence the following order:

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the

petitioners shall be released on bail in the event of their

arrest in connection with Crime No.278/2019 of

Konanakunte Police Station, subject to the following

conditions:-

i) The petitioners shall surrender themselves
before the Investigating Officer within Ten days
from the date of receipt of a certified copy of
this order and each of them shall execute their
respective personal bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties each for the
like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned
Jurisdictional Court.

6

ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in hampering
the investigation or tampering the prosecution
witnesses.

iii) The petitioners shall appear before the Court on
all future hearing dates unless exempted by the
Court for any genuine reasons.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Akc

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