SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shankar S/O Rangappa Kambagi vs State Of Karnataka on 19 December, 2013

Karnataka High Court Shankar S/O Rangappa Kambagi vs State Of Karnataka on 19 December, 2013Author: Jawad Rahim

:1:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 19 t h DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013 BEFORE

THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM CRIMINAL PETITION No.11745 OF 2013 BETWEEN:

1. SHANKAR S/O RANGAPPA KAMBAGI, AGED: ABOUT 30 YEARS,

OCC: AGRICULTURIST,

R/O: ALBAL, TQ: JAMKHANDI,

DIST: BAGALKOT.

2. LAXMIBAI W/O RANGAPPA KAMBAGI, AGED: ABOUT 50 YEARS,

OCC: AGRICULTURIST,

R/O: ALBAL, TQ: JAMKHANDI,

DIST: BAGALKOT.

3. REKHA W/O DASHARATH CHINAGUNDI, AGED: ABOUT 25 YEARS,

OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,

R/O: ALBAL, TQ: JAMKHANDI,

DIST: BAGALKOT.

… PETITIONERS

(By Sri. SHIVARAJ.C.BELLAKKI ADV.) AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY PSI JAMKHANDI,

:2:

RURAL PSI THROUGH PUBLIC

PROSECUTOR

… RESPONDENT

(By Sri.V.M.BANAKAR, ASPP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN JAMKHANDI RURAL POLICE STATION CRIME NO.152/2013 ALLEGING OFFENCES P/U/S 498-A, 323, 504, 34 OF IPC AND U/S 3 & 4 OF DP ACT, 1961.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: O R D E R

The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 facing charge for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No.152/2013. Petitioners apprehending their arrest seek direction to release them in the event of their arrest.

2. The prosecution’s case is based on the report of Kusuma Kambagi seeking action against the petitioners on the allegation that she married petitioner No.1 about 1½ years prior to submitting :3:

the report and entered matrimony. She had to reside with petitioner No.1 in the house occupied by petitioners 2 and 3. Her marriage was performed after meeting the demand of dowry. They were given amount in cash and valuable articles, but their greed was not satisfied. They raised demand for Rs.50,000/- in cash and 2 tola of gold to be given immediately. She could not arrange to meet their demands, consequent to which, petitioners 1 and 2 and 3 r d petitioner–who is the sister of petitioner No.1, indulged in physical and mental torture, making the life of complainant miserable. She imbued the onslaught, but it became unbearable. During this period, she could not even seek help. On 15.09.2013, she consumed toxic oil used as mosquito repellant to end her life. Soon thereafter, she lodged the report, which is registered in Crime No.152/2013 for the offences indicated above, which is under investigation. Apprehending arrest, the petitioners seek grant of direction. :4:

3. The prosecution opposed the bail pointing out to the unjustified conduct of the petitioners in making the life of complainant miserable soon after marriage.

4. On perusal of the material made available, it could be seen, soon after the marriage, the petitioners indulged in demand for dowry, dissatisfied with the dowry given and in this regard, they are alleged to have indulged in act of violence and mental cruelty. No doubt, the report is under investigation, but as could be seen, the complainant is now in her parental house and is away from the petitioners. She would be the best witness to speak to the overt-acts of the petitioners and criminality in their conduct. She may not get easily subdued or won-over by the petitioners.

5. In the circumstances, even though interrogation of petitioners is necessary, custodial :5:

interrogation may not be justified. Being of this opinion, considering the fact that no direct overt-acts are attributed to the petitioners individually and a general statement has been made of alleged harassment, the petitioners could be trusted with the order sought, subject to following conditions:- i. The petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer in- charge of the investigation in Crime No.152/2013, within two weeks from now. On their appearance, the Investigating Officer may arrest them, but they shall be released on their executing bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one solvent surety for the like sum;

ii. After arrest and release in the manner aforesaid, the petitioners shall report before the S.H.O. of the complainant police station once in two weeks on Saturdays between 7.00 a.m. and 7.00 p.m.;

:6:

iii. They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and subject themselves for interrogation;

iv. They shall not tamper with the prosecution material or prevail upon the witnesses by any means.

With these observations, the petition is allowed.

SD/-

JUDGE

RK/-

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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