1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10257 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
SMT.MUNITHAYAMMA,
W/O KRISHNAPPA,
AGED 78 YEARS,
R/AT CHANNASANDRA VILLAGE,
HESARAGATTA HOBLI,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-560 088.
… PETITIONER
(BY SRI VENKATA REDDY S K., ADV.,)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
RAJANUKUNTE,
POLICE STATION,
BEGALURU-560 064.
SPP, HCK, BENGALURU-01.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HER ARREST IN CRIME
NO.273/2017 OF RAJANUKUNTE POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 304B,
302, 307, 498A R/W 34 OF IPC.
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused
No.2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory
bail, to direct the respondent-police to release the
petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest for the
offences punishable under Sections 304B, 498A, 302,
307 read with 34 of IPC registered in respondent police
station Crime No.273/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the
complaint averments that father of the deceased is the
complainant and Rajini is the deceased in this case. In
the complaint the allegations are made that Rajini was
given in marriage to accused No.1 of Channasandra
village on 28.04.2016. Later on Rajini gave birth to a
female child Lasya. Rajini was living with her husband
3
in his house. On 23.11.2017 at about 3.48 P.M.,
accused No.1 has telephoned to the mobile phone of one
Umashankar, who is the son of the complainant and in
reply to the said phone, the wife of
complainant/Vijayamma has telephoned to the mobile
of accused No.1 she was informed that her daughter
Rajini was admitted in Aster CSI Hospital at Kodigehalli
gate, Bengaluru. Immediately, the complainant and his
wife and relatives rushed to the said hospital and
enquired in the reception counter of the Hospital, got
information that Rajini was in emergency ward and then
found died by consuming poison. The grand daughter
Lasya was in a dangerous condition. Accordingly, the
complaint was filed against the accused including the
petitioner by alleging that when the deceased Rajini
failed to get further dowry, the accused including the
petitioner have committed the murder of Rajini and also
attempted to commit murder of Lasya. Hence, on the
4
basis of the said complaint, FIR came to be registered
for the alleged offence.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the
learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for
the respondent-State.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on
record.
5. Looking into the allegations made in the
complaint by the father of the deceased, no doubt there
are allegations even as against the petitioner that
accused No.1 and the present petitioner were giving ill-
treatment to the deceased insisting her to bring dowry
amount from her parental place and as she was not able
to bring additional dowry amount the daughter as well
5
as the grand daughter of the complainant were
administered poison by the petitioner as well as her son
and thereby they have committed the murder.
6. The petitioner has contended that false
allegations are made against her, she has not
committed the said offence and she is aged 78 years.
For the proof of age of the petitioner, learned counsel for
the petitioner has produced the Election Commission
Identity Card, showing the date of birth, wherein the
year is mentioned as 1940. In the cause title of the
petition, the age of the petitioner is mentioned as 78
years, which fact is not disputed seriously by the
prosecution.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner while
arguing the case, submitted that the grand child
survived because of the immediate treatment, but the
6
parents refused to receive the said child, therefore, the
child is with the care and custody of petitioner herein.
8. As per the complaint averments such
allegations are made even against the petitioner also.
But looking to the age of the petitioner that she is aged
nearly about 80 years and is a woman, I am of the
opinion that by imposing reasonable conditions,
petitioner can be granted with anticipatory bail.
9. Therefore, petition is allowed. The
respondent-Police is directed to enlarge the present
petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest in
connection with Crime No. 273/2017 registered for the
above said offences, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal
bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and shall
furnish one surety for the likesum to
the satisfaction of the arresting
authority.
7
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of
the prosecution witnesses, directly or
indirectly.
iii. Petitioner has to make herself available
before the Investigating Officer for
interrogation, as and when called for
and to cooperate with the further
investigation.
iv. The petitioner has to appear before the
concerned Court within 30 days from
the date of this order and to execute
the personal bond and the surety
bond.
In view of the disposal of the main petition,
I.A.No.1/2017 does not survive for consideration.
Accordingly, same is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BSR