Karnataka High Court Sheik Sandani vs State By Byappanahalli Police … on 11 December, 2012Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012 BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.KESHAVANARAYANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.6755 OF 2012 BETWEEN:
Son of Sheik Ameer Basha
Aged about 27 years,
R/at NO.008, B Block
May Flower Garden Apartment
Original Native of
(By Shri K.Venkataramana Babu, Advocate) AND:
State by Byappanahalli Police Station Represented by SPP City Court
(By Shri K.Rajesh Rai, GP.,)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in CC No.22801/2012 and Cr.No.164/2012 of Byappanahalli P.S., Bangalore City, for the offence P/U/S 304B r/w Sec.34 of IPC and Sec.3&4 of D.P.Act. This Criminal Petition coming on for orders on this day, the Court made the following: – ORDER
Petitioner married deceased Shabana Shaik daughter of Yasdhan Basha Shaik, resident of Sollurpeta, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh on 09.10.2011. It is alleged that at the time of marriage, the parents of this petitioner demanded dowry of Rs.15.00 lakhs in cash but the parents of the bride offered Rs.10.00 lakhs, for which the petitioner’s parents agreed and accordingly, Rs.10.00 lakhs was paid as dowry to the mother of this petitioner. After the marriage, the deceased joined her husband and as the deceased was working as a software Engineer in Chennai, she got herself transferred to Bangalore, where this petitioner was employed on 30.01.2012 and thereafter, they started living in Dr.No.008B, May Flower Garden, 3
Nagavarapalya, Bengaluru. At about 11.00 a.m., on 30.06.2012, the said Shabana Shaik was found hanging in the aforesaid house. Immediately, the parents of the deceased received information from this petitioner and rushed to the place and saw their daughter lying dead. Thereafter, the father of the deceased lodged a report before the jurisdictional police alleging that while the deceased was staying with this petitioner in Bangalore parents of this petitioner were insisting this petitioner to coerce the deceased to bring further money, that this petitioner was pressurizing the deceased to take loan from her company and also was demanding her to sell gold and to give money. However, when this was informed to the complainant, he arranged for Rs.2.00 lakhs and gave the sum to this petitioner on 27.02.2012. It was further alleged in the complaint that the deceased was being harassed by this petitioner for more money. On the basis of the said report, a case in Crime No.164/2012 for the offences punishable under sections 498A, 304B r/w Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 4
and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act came to be registered and investigation was taken up.
2. The Postmortem examination conducted revealed the death of the deceased was due to asphyxia as a result of hanging. During investigation this petitioner arraigned as accused No.1 was apprehended on 01.07.2012 and later subjected to judicial custody. The application filed for bail by this petitioner during the pendency of the investigation came to be rejected both by the Sessions Court and by this Court. Further, application filed by the petitioner after filing of the charge sheet for grant of bail also came to be rejected by the Sessions Court. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. The petition is opposed by respondent-State.
4. I have heard both the sides and perused the records made available.
5. At this stage, the materials on record prima facie indicates that the death of the deceased has occurred within about nine months of the marriage and her death was under unnatural circumstances and it has occurred in the matrimonial home where this petitioner and deceased were residing. Allegations made in the complaint lodged by the father of the deceased as also the statements of the blood relatives of the deceased and other witnesses prima facie indicates that soon before her death the deceased had been subjected to cruelty and harassment in relation to demand for dowry. Thus, at this stage, the materials on record, prima facie indicates that the death of the deceased was dowry death within the meaning of Section 304B IPC. The offence under Section 304B IPC is punishable with a minimum imprisonment of seven years which may extend to imprisonment for life. The petitioner is stated to be a permanent resident of State of Andhra Pradesh.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and materials available on 6
record at this stage, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner is guilty of the aforesaid offences and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he is likely to flee away from the justice and thereby hampering the case.
7. Regard being had to the nature and gravity of the offence, as well as the punishment prescribed for the same, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the petition is rejected. SD/-