SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt Sarojamma vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 October, 2019

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6629/2019

BETWEEN:

1. Smt.Sarojamma,
W/o late Venkatesh,
Aged about 54 years,
Resident of No.14,
2nd Cross,
Old Bank Colony,
Konanakunte,
Bengaluru-560 062.

2. Sri.Anjinappa.C.R.,
S/o Late Ramappa,
Aged about 66 years,
Resident of
Chunchedenahalli,
Arabikothnur, Kolar District,
Karnataka-563 133.
…Petitioners
(By Sri.Basavaraju P., Advocate)

AND:

The State of Karnataka,
Konanakunte Police Station
Represented by
The State Public Prosecutor
2

High Court of Karnataka
Bengaluru-560 001.
…Respondent
(By Sri.Honnappa, HCGP)

This Criminal 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.215/2019 of Konanakunte
Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence p/u/s 498A,
304B r/w 34 of SectionIPC and Section 3 and 4 of D.P.Act.

This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following:

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the

records.

2. Petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos. 2

and 3 in Crime No.215/2019 registered by the

respondent-Police for the offence punishable under

Sections 498A, Section304B read with Section 34 of IPC and

Sections 3 and Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. The brief factual matrix of the case are that the

complainant’s daughter by name Pallavi was given in
3

marriage to accused No.1-Naveen Kumar on 09.06.2019

and at the time of marriage, Rs.1,00,000/- cash and gold

articles were given for consideration of marriage. After

marriage, husband and wife together lived happily for 20

days. Thereafter, accused demanded Rs.1,00,000/- and it

is alleged that the above amount has been paid to the

accused. After some days, again they demanded for a sum

of Rs.1,00,000/- but complainant told that he had no

money and asked the deceased to wait for some time. It is

alleged that the accused have threatened the deceased

with dire consequences, if she does not bring money.

Afraid of such threat, the deceased committed suicide in

the house of the accused persons.

4. On perusal of the records, it shows that,

accused No.1 has already been arrested and in judicial

custody. The petitioner No.1 is aged about 55 years and

petitioner No.2 is aged about 66 years. The petitioner No.1

is a lady and there are no specific or distinct allegations
4

regarding the nature of ill-treatment and harassment or

cruelty given to the deceased except stating in the FIR that

there was a threat to bring some money. Within a span of

2 months the death has occurred in the house of the

accused. Petitioner No.2 is not residing with the accused

Nos. 1 and 2. He is resident of Arabikothnur, Kolar

District. When he visited the house of the accused and

when the incident took place, are not stated in the FIR

and it has to be proved during the course of full dressed

trial.

5. Looking to the nature of allegations and facts

of the case, in my opinion, petitioners-accused Nos. 2 and

3 are entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the

following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners-

accused Nos.2 and 3 shall be released on bail in the event

of their arrest in connection with Crime No.215/2019 of
5

Konanakunte Police Station, for the alleged offences,

subject to the following conditions:-

i) The petitioners shall surrender themselves
before the Investigating Officer within Ten
days from the date of receipt of a certified
copy of this order and each of them shall
execute their personal bonds for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with
two sureties for the like-sum to the
satisfaction of the concerned Investigating
Officer.

ii) The petitioners shall not indulge in hampering
the investigation or tampering the prosecution
witnesses.

iii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the
Investigating Officer to complete the
investigation, and they shall appear before the
Investigating Officer as and when called for.

iv) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction
of Investigating Officer without prior
6

permission, till the charge sheet is filed or for
a period of three months whichever is earlier.

v) The petitioners shall mark their attendance
once in a week i.e, on every Sunday between
10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the
Investigating Officer for a period of two
months or till the charge sheet is filed,
whichever is earlier.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SB

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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