SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Praveen vs State Of Karnataka on 8 January, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201490/2019

Between:

Praveen S/o Late Prabhu Hadapada
Age: 30 years, Occ: Government Servant
Peon in Women Child Welfare Department
Bidar, R/o Rampure Colony, Bidar
Dist: Bidar-585401
… Petitioner

(By Sri Sanjay A. Patil, Advocate)

And:

State of Karnataka through
Police, Womens Police Station
Bidar, Dist: Bidar-585401
Represented by Addl. SPP
High Court of Karnataka
Kalaburagi Bench-585107
… Respondent

(By Sri P.S.Patil, HCGP)

This criminal petition is filed under 439 of Cr.P.C.
praying to allow the petition thereby enlarge the petitioner
on bail in C.C.No.1968/2019 pending on the file of I Addl.
Crl.P.No.201490/2019
2

Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Bidar arising out of Crime
No.23/2019 registered by respondent Police/Women Police
Station, Bidar, Dist: Bidar, for the offences punishable
under Sections 498A, 304-B R/w 34 of IPC and Section 3
and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, as per charge sheet.

This petition coming on for orders this day, the court
made the following:

ORDER

The petitioner has sought for regular bail under

section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime

No.23/2019 of Women Police Station, Bidar, District

Bidar registered for the offences punishable under

sections 498A, 304B read with Section 34 of Indian

Penal Code (hereinafter for brevity referred to as

‘IPC’) and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act

arising out of C.C.No.1968/2019 pending on the file of

I-Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Bidar.

2. The present petitioner is admittedly the

husband of the deceased Narmada who is said to have

been given in marriage to the present petitioner in the

year 2014. According to the complainant, at the time
Crl.P.No.201490/2019
3

of the marriage 60 grams of gold and a cash of

`1,51,000/- was given to the present petitioner as

dowry. Though the petitioner was not in Government

service as on the date of his marriage with deceased

Narmada, subsequently, when he got a Government

appointment on compassionate ground, the

complainant alleges that, he started demanding

additional sum of `7,00,000/- stating that he has

become a Government employee. It is in that

situation, the present petitioner joined by his other

family members, were said to have subjecting the

deceased to constant cruelty. The complainant has

further stated that on the demand of the petitioner,

some more financial assistance to an extent of

`20,000/- was also made to them to enable them to

have a separate residence. Despite the same, the

petitioner being the husband of the deceased,

continued to demand an additional sum and placed a
Crl.P.No.201490/2019
4

demand for `7,00,000/- on the pretext that he would

secure a job to his wife in a private establishment.

When the complainant is said to have rejected the

said demand, the petitioner is said to have intensified

his alleged cruelty against the deceased. It is in that

circumstance, on 20.07.2019 the deceased is said to

have committed suicide by hanging herself in her

house.

3. After registering the complaint for the

offences punishable under sections 498A, 306 read

with section 34 of IPC, the police have conducted

investigation and have filed charge sheet against the

present petitioner and three more accused for the

offences punishable under sections 498A, 304B read

with section 34 of IPC and sections 3 and 4 of the

Dowry Prohibition Act.

Crl.P.No.201490/2019
5

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in his

argument, submitted that even after going through

the complaint, nowhere it mentions that the alleged

demand for `7,00,000/- was in the form of dowry.

There are no materials to show that soon prior to her

death, the deceased was subjected to cruelty,

particularly in connection with demand for dowry. As

such, the ingredient of section 304B of IPC is not

made out. He further submits that investigation has

already been completed and the petitioner, who is a

Government servant, is languishing in jail. He submits

that the petitioner would be abide by the conditions

imposed by this Court for enlarging him on bail.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader who has filed his statement of objections

submitted that the complaint gives a clear account of

cruelty meted to the deceased after her marriage with

the present petitioner. Incidentally, even on the date
Crl.P.No.201490/2019
6

of the alleged incident also the deceased was

subjected to cruelty as could be seen from the charge

sheet papers. In such a situation, the petitioner does

not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

6. The complainant is the mother of the

deceased, who in her complaint itself has given a

detailed account about the performance of marriage of

her daughter deceased Narmada with the present

petitioner in the year 2014. She has stated that at

the time of marriage, valuables in the form of dowry

including 60 grams of gold and a cash of `1,51,000/-

was given to the accused by them. However, some of

the ornaments were sold or pledged by the family of

the accused and the entire cash of `1,51,000/- was

spent by them. It is thereafter they are said to have

started demanding an additional sum of `7,00,000/-.

But it cannot be ignored that the complainant in her

complaint has stated that the said alleged demand of
Crl.P.No.201490/2019
7

`7,00,000/-, said to have been made by the

petitioner, was on the pretext that the said sum is

required to secure a job to the deceased in a private

establishment. When his alleged demand was turned

down by the complainant, the deceased is said to

have proceeded to commit suicide due to the alleged

further cruelty for which she is said to have been

subjected to.

7. In such a scenario, when the alleged

further demand of the deceased for `7,00,000/- is

apparently, and at this stage, shown to be the cause

for the deceased committing suicide, though within

seven years of her marriage with the petitioner, but

the question still remains as to whether said demand

amounts to a demand for additional dowry and the

another question also remains as to whether the

deceased was subjected to cruelty in connection with

dowry soon prior to her death. The answer to the
Crl.P.No.201490/2019
8

same can be obtained only in a full-fledged trial. For

the time being, suffice it to say when such a vital

question remains open for the trial and considering

the fact that the investigation has already been

completed and charge sheet has been filed,

continuation of the petitioner in judicial custody, who

is said to be a Government servant, is not warranted.

However, the apprehension of the prosecution that the

accused may flee from justice can be checked by

imposing reasonable conditions. Accordingly,

I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is enlarged

on bail in C.C.No.1968/2019 pending on the file of

I-Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Bidar arising out of

Crime No.23/2019 of respondent – police station

registered for the offences punishable under sections

498A, 304(B) read with Section 34 of IPC and sections
Crl.P.No.201490/2019
9

3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. However subject to

the conditions:

(i) That accused/petitioner shall execute a
personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/-
and furnish two local solvent sureties for
the like sum to the satisfaction of the
enlarging Court.

(ii) The petitioner to give in writing about
the change in his address, if any, to the
Investigating Officer as and when such
change occurs and obtain
acknowledgement in that regard.

(iii) The accused/petitioner shall appear
before the Court on all the dates of
hearing.

(iv) The accused/petitioner shall not hamper
or tamper the prosecution witnesses and
documents in any manner.

Sd/-

JUDGE
swk

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 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