IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3125/2019
BETWEEN:
Perumal
S/o. Manikyam,
Aged about 34 years,
R/at. No. Karthik Building,
Om Shakti Temple Road,
Sanjeevini Nagar,
Hegganahalli,
Bangalore-560 091. … Petitioner
(By Sri. Hashmath Pasha, Senior Counsel for
Sri. Syed Muzakkir Ahmed, Advocate)
AND:
State of Karnataka
By Rajagopalanagar Police Station,
Bangalore-560 096.
(Represented by learned State
Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Karnataka,
Bangalore-560 001). … Respondent
(By Sri. K.P. Yoganna, HCGP)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
the Code of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to
enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.309/2018 (S.C.
No.1551/2018) of Rajagopalnagar P.S., Bangalore for
the offences punishable under Sections 498A, Section302 of
IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The petitioner has sought to be enlarged on bail in
connection with his detention in Crime No.309/2018
with respect to the offences punishable under Sections
498(A) and Section302 of IPC.
2. The case that is made out by the prosecution
is that the deceased-Sangeetha had married the
petitioner about 15 years back and they have two
children, son-Madan Kumar, aged about 13 years and
daughter-Mani, aged about 10 years, respectively. It is
stated that the accused had developed a habit of
consuming alcohol and during intoxicated state, he
used to abuse and beat his wife and was insisting her to
3
bring money from her father. It is further stated that on
09.05.2018 at about 7:30 a.m., the petitioner had
informed the complainant, who is his father-in-law
about the death of his daughter. Subsequently, on the
basis of the complaint, a UDR case was registered and
investigation was commenced. The investigation is now
complete. The petitioner was arrested and has
continued to remain in custody since 27.05.2018.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that as per the
Inquest Report under Section 174 of Cr.P.C at Column
No.17, there is a clear observation that the cause of
death is not clearly ascertainable and further medical
investigation was sought for. It is submitted that only
on the basis of Histopathology Report, the Doctor had
opined that the cause of death was due to multiple
injuries sustained, which the learned Senior counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner states is a matter
to be proved.
4
4. Note is taken of the fact that the case rests
on circumstantial evidence as the circumstances of
death is a matter that does not come out clearly and
requires to be proved as there are no eye witness who
have witnessed the event of death of the deceased. It is
to be noted that the learned LIX Additional City Civil
and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru at the stage when
investigation was still to be completed has rejected the
application of the petitioner seeking to be enlarged on
bail.
5. Taking note of the fact that the charge sheet
having been filed and that the case rests on
circumstantial evidence and that CWs.2 and 8 were
examined and have turned hostile and also that
proceedings for bail cannot be treated to be proceedings
to punish the petitioner, the petitioner is enlarged on
bail. The petitioner has two children aged about 13
5
years and 10 years and they are in the custody of the
petitioner’s friend, is also a matter to be taken note of.
6. Accordingly, bail petition filed by the
petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed,
subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond
of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only)
with a surety for the likesum before the trial
Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the
expeditious disposal of the case and he shall
not indulge in any criminal activities
henceforth.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with
evidence, influence in any way any witness
or hamper directly or indirectly the
investigation.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RB
