1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8595/2017
BETWEEN:
Pradeep
S/o Mahendra
Aged about 26 years,
R/at No.8161, 2nd Main,
Near Eshwar Temple,
Mathikere, Bengaluru. .. Petitioner
( By Sri Gireesha J.T., Advocate )
AND
State by Soladevanahalli P.S.
Bangalore-560 096,
Represented by S.P.P.
High Court Building,
High Court-560 001. .. Respondent
( By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime
No.275/2017, of Soladevanahalli Police Station, Bangalore,
2
for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 328 of
IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following :
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the
offences punishable under Sections 498A and 328 of IPC,
registered in respondent – police station in Crime
No.275/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the
complaint averments are that, complainant is the wife of
petitioner/accused. She filed a complaint alleging that
when she had been to her native place for the purpose of
delivery, her husband also came to her native place and on
the date of the incident, he brought the juice and gave it
to her. After consuming the said juice, within 5 to 10
minutes, she had suffered stomach pain and chest pain
and she fell down. At that time, her husband went away
3
from the said place and her brother immediately shifted
her to hospital through ambulance. Hence, it is her
contention that he made an attempt to commit her murder
by giving such juice. Based on the said complaint, case
came to be registered.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner/accused and the learned High
Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-
State, so also the order of the learned Sessions Judge,
rejecting the bail application of the petitioner.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on
record.
5. One of the ground for rejection of the bail
application by the concerned trial Court that petitioner has
not produced any material to show that his wife was
discharged from the hospital. The learned counsel for the
4
petitioner made the submission that on 16.8.2017 itself,
she was discharged from the hospital, which statement is
not disputed by the prosecution before this Court. He has
denied the allegations made in the complaint and states
that there is a false implication of the petitioner and he is
ready to abide by any of the reasonable conditions to be
imposed by this Court. The alleged offences are triable by
the Magistrate Court and are not exclusively punishable
with death or imprisonment for life. At present, the
condition of the complainant – wife of the petitioner, is
safe and it is out of danger. Hence, by imposing
reasonable conditions, the petitioner can be ordered to be
released on bail.
8. Accordingly, petition is allowed.
Petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on bail for the
offences punishable under Sections 498A and 328 of IPC,
registered in Crime No.275/2017, subject to the following
conditions:
5
i. Petitioner has to execute a personal bond
for Rs.50,000/- and has to furnish one
surety for the likesum to the satisfaction
of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of
the prosecution witnesses, directly or
indirectly.
iii. Petitioner has to appear before the
concerned Court regularly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
bk/
