Karnataka High Court Ravi Kumar B H vs State By Hosadurga P S on 7 March, 2014Author: Budihal R.B.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2014 BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R. B. CRL.P.NO. 606 OF 2014
RAVI KUMAR B. H.,
S/O. LATE T. HANUMANTHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/O. VINAYAKA BADAVANE,
HOSADURGA – 577 527.
(By SRI. ADINARAYANAPPA, ADV.)
STATE BY HOSADURGA P S .,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE – 560 001.
(By SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) * *** *
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN 2
CR. NO.365/2013 OF HOSADURGA P.S., CHITRADURGA, WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A,323,324,504,506,114 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3 AND 4 OF D.P.ACT.
THIS CRL. PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER
This petition is filed by petitioner-accused no.1 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 324, 504, 506, 114, R/w.Sec.34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. registered in Hosadurga Police Station, Chitradurga in Cr.No.365/2013.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution as per averments made in the complaint is that, marriage of the complainant was performed with the petitioner accused no.1 on 28.2.2013 and at the time of marriage, they have paid rupees two lakhs and also gold ornaments worth 200 grams to the petitioner and after the marriage, the complainant went to the house of the petitioner to lead 3
marital life. One week after the marriage, she was ill- treated and put forth demand for dowry. Thereafter, petitioner and accused nos.2 to 5 started giving harassment and ill-treating the complainant insisting her to bring more dowry amount. It is also alleged in the complaint that the petitioner at the instigation of the other accused persons assaulted the complainant with the belt and a stick and snatched her gold ornaments and then he driven her out of the house.
4. On the basis of said complaint, case has been registered against the present petitioner and other accused persons.
5. I have also perused the statements and the reasons recorded by the Investigation Officer during the investigation. It is no doubt true even the witnesses have stated about the illtreament said to have been given by the petitioner and his family members.
6. In the bail petition, it is contended by the petitioner that other accused persons were not at all residing along with the present petitioner and they are 4
residing separately and the allegation of illtreatment to the complainant and demand of more dowry is a false allegation and are made against the petitioner and his family members falsely and other family members are falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner has also undertaken that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by the Court. The offences alleged against the petitioner are all triable by the Magistrate Court and they are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
7. It is contended by the learned HCGP appearing for State that the matter is still under investigation and if bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond and he may tamper the witnesses.
8. For this, reasonable conditions may be imposed., which will safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Petitioner has made out a case for his release on bail.
9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Respondent-Police are directed to release the petitioner-accused no.1 on bail in the event of his arrest of the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 324, 504, 506, 114, R/w.Sec.34 of IPC and 5
Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. registered in Hosadurga Police Station, Chitradurga in Cr.No.365/2013 subject to the following conditions : (i) The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) and shall furnish a surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not intimidate or tamper with prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
(iii) The petitioner shall make himself available before the IO for interrogation whenever called for.
(iv) He has to appear before the concerned Magistrate within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order for execution of personal bond and surety bond.