SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ramanna vs The State on 2 January, 2020








Ramanna S/o Virupaxappa
Bhandari, Age: 35 years, Occ: Nil
R/o Sarjapur village,
Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584122
… Petitioner

(By Sri Punith H. Markal, Advocate)


The State through
Lingsugur Police Station
Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur
Represented by Addl. SPP
HCK, Kalaburagi-585107
… Respondent

(By Sri Mallikarjun Sahukar, HCGP)

This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. praying to allow this petition and to direct the
respondent police to enlarge the petitioners on bail, in the
event of his arrest in connection with the Crime No.269/2019
2 Crl.P.No.201647/2019

registered with the Lingsugur Police Station, dist: Raichur,
which is pending before Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) JMFC
Court, Lingsugur, Raichur district for the alleged offences
punishable under Sections 143, Section147, Section148, Section498A, Section504, Section323,
Section324, Section494, Section354, Section307, Section109 read with Section 149 of IPC.

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

The petitioner who is accused No.1 in Crime

No.269/2019 of Lingasugur police station has filed this

petition seeking his enlargement on bail under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offences

punishable under Sections 143, Section147, Section148, Section498A, Section504,

Section323, Section324, Section494, Section354, Section307 and Section109 read with Section 149

of Indian Penal Code.

2. The summary of the case of the prosecution is

that the complainant Vijaylakshmi was married to the

present petitioner about eight years back. Thereafter,

she had marital life with her husband for about two to

three years. During the said period she gave birth to
3 Crl.P.No.201647/2019

three children. Subsequently, the petitioner without any

knowledge to the complainant married his niece by

name Shridevi and started subjecting his legally wedded

wife i.e., the complainant to cruelty. That made the

complainant to file a case against her husband, in which

regard she used to visit the Court. Whenever the

complainant was attending the Court on the date of

hearing, the petitioner and his sisters used to threaten

the complainant of dire consequences and giving life

threat to her. The complainant has further stated in her

complaint that at the advice of her parents and family

members, she was taken to her husband’s house on

10.11.2019. However, her husband and other members in

his family denied her of admitting into their family, rather,

they severely assaulted her and mentioning that they

would get rid of her, they put fire to her by pouring petrol

and also litting fire to her body. At the timely intervention

of parental family members of the complainant,
4 Crl.P.No.201647/2019

further serious consequences were avoided.

Accordingly, at the instance of said information given by

the injured, the complaint came to be registered against

the present petitioner, arraying him as accused No.1

and several others for the alleged offences.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in his

argument submitted that the alleged overt act is not

heinous or serious, but, it is cooked up story from the

complainant and his family members. While drawing the

attention of this Court, wherein an observation is made

by the Sessions Judge in the Court below in a similar

application filed by the other accused in the same FIR,

the learned counsel submitted that the Trial Court also

has noticed that the percentage of alleged burns upon

the complainant was only 3% to 4%, as such also, it

cannot be called that there was an attempt to kill the

complainant by the petitioner.

5 Crl.P.No.201647/2019

4. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader though has not filed their statement of

objections to the petition, still submitted that the

complaint itself would clearly go to show that the

petitioner, joined by his other family members, have

attempted to take away the life of the complainant, who

is none else then the wife of the petitioner.

5. A reading of the complaint at this stage prima

facie would go to show that the complainant is none else

than the wife of the petitioner, has given the details of

the alleged incident said to have been attempted against

her life. She has specifically stated that after the

petitioner/accused No.1 marrying his sister’s daughter

as his second wife, he started subjecting the complainant

to cruelty. She has given an instance of incident which is

said to have been taken place on 10.11.2019. She has

specifically stated in her complaint that opposing and

protesting her rejoining, the petitioner
6 Crl.P.No.201647/2019

has attempted to kill her by pouring petrol and litting

fire to her body. When the complainant who is none

else than the wife of the accused/petitioner has given

such narration in the complaint, at this stage and for the

purpose of considering the present petition, the said

narration cannot be ignored and cannot be taken as an

imagination of the complainant. Further, as submitted

by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the

investigation is still in progress, for which purpose, the

petitioner’s apprehension is required. Hence, the relief

as sought by the petitioner cannot be granted.

Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 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