-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9482 OF 2017

Between:
1. Smt.Chikkamma
W/o Late Kikkeri Gowda
Aged about 65 years

2. Sri Manjunatha
S/o Late Kikkeri Gowda
Aged about 31 years
Both are residents of
Paduvanahalli Village
Halekote Hobli
Holenarasipura Taluk
Hassan District .. Petitioners

(By Sri.Sudarshan L, Advocate)

And

State by Holenarasipura Town
Police Station,
Represented by the Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Karnataka,
Bengaluru – 560 001. .. Respondent

(By Sri.K.Nageshwarappa, HCGP)
-2-

This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C
praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of
their arrest in Cr.No.292/2017 of Holenarasipura town
Police Station, Hassan District for the offences
punishable under Sections 498(A), 302, 304(B) R/W 34
of IPC and section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

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

This is a petition filed by the petitioners-accused

filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C seeking direction to

the respondent police to release them on bail in the

event of their arrest for the alleged offence punishable

under Section 498A and 302 of IPC and Sections 3 and

4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered in the respondent

police Station in Crime No.292/2017.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel

for the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 3 and the learned

HCGP for respondent-State.

3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail

petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on
-3-

record and also the order of learned Sessions Judge,

Hassan rejecting the bail application of the petitioners

herein.

4. Perusing the contents of the complaint, the

serious allegations are against accused No.1-husband of

the deceased who is in custody. So far as present

petitioners are concerned there are vague and bald

allegations. No specific allegations are made about what

was the ill treatment said to have given by the

petitioners. The contents of the complaint goes to show

that it is accused No.1-husband that he started to give ill

treatment to the deceased that she gave birth to a female

child. He was coming to home by consuming alcohol in a

drunken state, abused and assaulted the deceased.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that

petitioners are innocent and not involved in committing

the said offences and there is false implication on them
-4-

and that they are ready to abide by any reasonable

condition that may be imposed by this Court.

5. Hence, looking to the materials placed on

record, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise

discretion in favour of the petitioners. Accordingly,

petition is allowed. The respondent-Police is directed to

enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest

for the alleged offence registered in respondent police

station in Crime No.292/2017, subject to the following

conditions:

i) Petitioners shall execute a personal bond
for Rs.1,00,000/- each and has to furnish
one surety for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the arresting authority.

ii) Petitioners shall not tamper with any of
the prosecution witnesses, directly or
indirectly.

iii) Petitioners shall make themselves
available before the Investigating Officer
-5-

for interrogation, as and when called for
and to cooperate with the further
investigation.

iv) The petitioners shall appear before the
concerned Court within 30 days from the
date of this order and to execute the
personal bond and the surety bond.

Sd/-

JUDGE

dn/-