SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt Perla Krishna Komali vs State Of Karnataka By on 26 June, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4388 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

SMT PERLA KRISHNA KOMALI
W/O P V SATHYANARAYANA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT NO.73-4-38,
G.F-1,B-BLOCK,
“MANJUS RESIDENCY”,
THOTAVAARI STREET,
OPPOSITE HIGH SCHOOL ROAD,
PATAMATA,VIJAYAWADA,
ANDRA PRADESH-520 010
… PETITIONER

(BY SRI: R.P. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE A/W
SRI: SUNIL KUMAR.S ADVOCATE)

AND

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
H.S.R.LAYOUT POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY.
(STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX
BANGALORE-01). … RESPONDENT

(BY SRI: K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
2

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.121/2018 OF
HSR LAYOUT POLICE STATION, BANGALORE CITY FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 304B AND 498A OF
IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF D.P ACT.

THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

This petition is filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking

regular bail in Cr.No.121/2018 registered for the offences

punishable under sections 304-B and 498-A of Indian Penal

Code and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned HCGP. The learned HCGP has not filed any statement of

objections, but has orally opposed the petition.

2. The petitioner is the mother-in-law of the deceased.

According to the prosecution, the deceased was ill-treated and

harassed in her matrimonial home. The petitioner herein is

alleged to have demanded dowry and subjected the deceased to

ill-treatment and cruelty. Further case of the prosecution is that
3

the deceased committed suicide on 19.04.2018 in the house

where she was residing with accused No.1.

3. Undisputedly, the petitioner herein was residing at

Andhra Pradesh, whereas the incident in question took place in

HSR Layout, Bengaluru, which clearly indicate that the petitioner

and the deceased were not residing together. Nonetheless,

having regard to the allegations made against the petitioner, I do

not find that the custody of the petitioner is anyway necessary

for the purpose of investigation. Substantial investigation is

already completed. The petitioner is a woman, who has been in

judicial custody since 28.04.2018. Her presence for the purpose

of trial would be secured.

4. Hence, the following order:-

Criminal petition is allowed.

a) Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on

furnishing a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

(Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the

likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional

court.

4

b) Petitioner shall appear before the court as and

when required.

c) Petitioner shall not threaten or allure the

prosecution witnesses in whatsoever manner.

d) Petitioner shall not get involved in similar

offences.

e) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the

Trial Court without prior permission of the Trial

Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE

*mn/-

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