SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Noor Fathima vs State Of Karnataka on 25 March, 2014

Karnataka High Court Noor Fathima vs State Of Karnataka on 25 March, 2014Author: Budihal R.B.

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2014 BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B. CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1517 OF 2014 BETWEEN:

NOOR FATHIMA

AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

DAUGHTER OF GHOUSE BAIG

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT

#17 (JP), 6TH CROSS, L.I.C.COLONY 3RD BLOCK EAST, JAYANAGAR

BANGALORE-560011

… PETITIONER

(BY SRI.S.A.WAJID, ADV.,)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY:

PULIKESHI NAGAR P.S (FRAZER TOWN P.S) BANGALORE-560005

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HER ARRET IN CR.NO.382/2013 OF PULAKESHINAGAR P.S., BANGALORE CITY, WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A AND 307 OF IPC.

2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER

This is the petition filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest of the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498A and 307 of IPC registered in the respondent – police station Crime No.382/2013.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner – accused No.3 and also learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State.

3. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint, order passed by the lower Court on bail application and other materials placed on record.

3

4. Accused No.1 is the husband of the complainant. Perusing the averments made in the complaint serious allegations are made as against accused No.1 that he was demanding money from the complainant and in that connection, he used to give ill- treatment and harassing her both physically and mentally. Looking to the allegations made in the complaint, sofar as the present petitioner is concerned that she was instigating the petitioner-Accused No.1 and on that basis accused No.1 used to pick up quarrel with his wife ie., the complainant, except this there is no allegations sofar as the present petitioner is concerned. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner – accused No.3 that accused No.1 and the complainant were residing separately. The present petitioner was not at all residing with them, so the petitioner – accused No.3 is totally innocent and not at all involved in the commission of the alleged offences and it is the contention of the learned counsel that the present petitioner is falsely implicated in the case. He 4

also made the submission that even accused No.2 has been granted with anticipatory bail. Now, it is not the contention of the learned High Court Government Pleader that the complainant is still in the hospital and getting the treatment. The offences alleged are also not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Petitioner has undertaken in her petition that she is having small children, she has to take care of the children and she is ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by this Court. Therefore, looking to the materials placed on record, so also the allegations made in the complaint, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the present petitioner.

5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent – police are directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest of the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498A and 5

307 of IPC registered in the respondent – police station Crime No.382/2013, subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

(iii) The petitioner shall make herself available to the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for. (iv) The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court within thirty days from the date of this order and execute the personal bond, as well as the surety bond.

In view of the disposal of the main petition itself, the application seeking interim bail does not survive for consideration.

6

Accordingly, it is also disposed of. Sd/-

JUDGE

GH

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