CRL.P.No.100867/2018

:1:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2018

BEFORE

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

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100867/2018

BETWEEN:

SHRI.SACHIN MARUTI SONAVANE,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O KUSTAGI CHAWL, BETAGERI-CIRCLE,
TAL DIST: GADAG.
… PETITIONER

(BY SRI.G.B.NAIK, SMT.P.G.NAIK, ADVS.)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH,
(BETAGERI POLICE STATION)
… RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, HCGP)
—

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C.
PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN BETAGERI
POLICE CRIME NO.74/2018 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 498A AND 306 OF IPC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.P.No.100867/2018

:2:

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section

439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his enlargement on bail in Crime

No.74/2018 of respondent-police for the offences

punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the IPC.

2. The summary of the case of the prosecution as

could be gathered at this stage is that, one Govardhan

Kadam said to be the father of the deceased Namita lodged

a written complaint before the respondent-police on

28.03.2018 at 8.30 a.m, the summary of which is that,

Namita, the daughter of the complainant, was given in

marriage to the present petitioner about one year 10

months back. For about six months after marriage, they

led a peaceful married life. However, for a simple

comment made by the wife of the complainant, i.e., the

mother-in-law of the petitioner herein, the petitioner (son-

in-law of the complainant) felt annoyed and stopped

visiting his in-law’s house. Further, the said son-in-law

(the petitioner herein) also stopped sending his wife to her
CRL.P.No.100867/2018

:3:

parental house. Despite the complainant requesting his

son-in-law, he did not send his wife (daughter of the

complainant) to her parental house. It is further the

allegation made in his complaint that, in the meantime,

the accused being the husband of the deceased Namita,

started subjecting her to cruelty and was also accusing

her that she was not in a condition to bear any child. The

complainant has also stated that, his daughter Namita

used to contact him over telephone and tell him about the

cruelty for which she was subjected to by her husband,

such as, her husband keeping a distance from her, not

talking with her and not sleeping with her for months

together. It is also alleged that, she was otherwise also

abused by her husband.

That being the case, on 27.03.2018, on receiving a

telephonic information in the night that his daughter was

not well, the complainant joined by his wife and son

rushed to the house of the accused and seen there that

his daughter Namita was dead. Looking at the
CRL.P.No.100867/2018

:4:

circumstance in that place including a ligature mark on

her neck, he suspected a foul play and suspected that,

because of the cruelty meted to Namita by her husband,

she committed suicide.

The complainant police registered a complaint

against the present petitioner for the offences punishable

under Section 498A and 306 of the IPC.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner while

reiterating the contention taken up by her in the

memorandum of petition, submitted that the entire

allegation made in the complaint are baseless and are

created. There is no allegation, which can be directly

attributed to any instigation made to the deceased by the

petitioner to commit suicide. The material does not reveal

as to what transpired between the husband and wife on

the previous night of the alleged incident.

4. The learned HCGP, who has taken notice for

the respondent-State, in his objection submitted that the
CRL.P.No.100867/2018

:5:

complaint on its prima facie reading itself go to show that,

already the deceased was subjected to cruelty constantly

by the accused. It is not mere a bare comment made by

the mother-in-law of the accused, but it is the accusation

made by the petitioner to his wife repeatedly accusing that

she was not alright and that she cannot give birth to any

child, and also keeping a distance from her, is the mental

cruelty meted to the deceased by the accused. He further

submitted that investigation is still in progress and the

material placed at this stage since makes a prima facie

case against the petitioner, he does not deserve to be

enlarged on bail.

5. The deceased is none-else than the wife of the

present petitioner. Their marriage is said to have taken

place about one year ten months prior to the death of the

deceased. The complainant being none-else than the

father of the deceased, has given few instances of the

behaviour of his son-in-law as to how he reacted even for

a small statement made by the wife of the complainant in
CRL.P.No.100867/2018

:6:

her capacity as mother-in-law of the accused. He has

narrated about the petitioner not sending his wife to her

parental house despite repeated requests. More

importantly, the complainant in his complaint itself has

stated that, he has heard from his daughter/deceased

about she being treated in a cruel manner by her husband

by making unsustainable allegations and also keeping a

distance from her for no valid reasons.

6. In this scenario, when the alleged incident of

death of deceased Namita is seen, it can be inferred that

the complainant, after noticing a ligature mark present on

her neck and also the circumstance of the case, has

suspected a foul play by none else than her husband i.e.,

the present petitioner. It cannot be ignored of the fact

that the complainant has not arrayed any other family

members of the husband of the deceased except her

husband. Even according to the prosecution,

investigation is still in progress. The exact reason which

drew the deceased to commit suicide is a matter of
CRL.P.No.100867/2018

:7:

investigation. As such, at this stage, no conclusive

opinion can be expressed either about the nature of death

or about the cause for the death. However, suffice it to

say that prima facie there are materials raising the finger

towards the petitioner/accused. According to the

prosecution, continuation of the accused in judicial

custody is also needed for investigating purpose.

7. In view of the same, considering the

circumstances of the case as could be made out at this

stage and the allegation levelled against the accused, I am

of the view that the petitioner does not deserve to be

enlarged on bail.

Accordingly, the petition stands rejected.

Sd/-

JUDGE

MBS/gab