SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Vijayamma vs State Of Karnataka By on 14 December, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8384/2018

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. VIJAYAMMA
W/O YASURATHNAM
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT SC COLONY IRASALAGUNDAM
PRAKASAM ANDHRA PRADESH
PIN – 523245

ALSO AT -NO446,
13TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN
RAJENDRANAGAR, KORAMANGALA
BENGALURU CITY.

2. PRABHUDAS
S/O JOKAFA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT NO 413, 9TH CROSS
7TH MAIN ROAD
RAJENDRANAGAR
BENGALURU SOUTH
BENGALURU- 560047.

3. DANIEL
S/O DAVID,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
2

PRAKASHMA DISTRICT, PODALI TALUKA
K.K. METILU MADAM
YECHALUGODAM GRAMA
TAMIL NADU-514356. :PETITIONERS

(BY SRI K.B.K. SWAMY, ADV.)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
ADUGODI POLICE STATION
BENGALURU CITY
(REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560001. :RESPONDENT

( BY SRI K.P. YOGANNA, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION

438 CR.P.C. 1973 PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE

PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST

IN CRIME NO.263/2018 OF ADUGODI POLICE STATION,

BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A,304B OF

IPC AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF D.P ACT.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS

THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

learned High Court Government Pleader. Perused the

records.

2. On the basis of the complaint filed by brother

of deceased Smt. Mariamma @ Mary, the respondent

police have registered the case. The allegations are that on

16.10.2017 his sister was married by accused No.1 –

Israel. At the time of marriage, dowry of Rs.40,000/- and

16 grams of gold chain was given to the accused.

Thereafter accused No.1 and other petitioners started

demanding more dowry and harassed his sister. As a

result, on 17.10.2018 in the day time when there was

nobody in the house, she committed suicide by hanging

herself to the ceiling fan at her residential house. The

petitioners are responsible for the suicide committed by

the victim.

3. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners were not residing with the victim and her
4

husband at Bengaluru. Petitioners are all residing at a

different place. The allegations made regarding

harassment are false and baseless. The police officials are

making attempts to arrest the petitioners. In the event of

arrest, the petitioners will be put to hardship.

4. Learned High Court Government Pleader

submitted that petitioners along with accused No.1 have

caused harassment to the victim to get dowry, thereby

they have instigated the victim to commit suicide. As

such, they are not entitled to bail.

5. The documents produced by the counsel for

the petitioners namely Aadhar Cards disclose that the

petitioners are residing at a different place away from the

victim. At this stage no grounds are made out to show

that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary.

The main objection of the prosecution is that in the event

of granting bail, the petitioners are likely to interfere with

the investigation. Said objection may be set right by

imposing stringent conditions.

5

6. Considering the nature of allegations made in

the complaint and the grounds urged, I am of the view

that the petition deserves to be allowed subject to certain

terms and conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the

following:

ORDER

The criminal petition is allowed.

The petitioners are directed to surrender before the

I.O. within ten days from the date of supply of a certified

copy of this bail order. On their appearance the I.O. shall

conduct the interrogation. Thereafter the petitioners shall

be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioners shall furnish a personal

bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each,

with two sureties for the like sum to the

satisfaction of the I.O. / Court;

(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the

Investigating Officer as and when

required;

6

(iii) The petitioners shall mark their

attendance twice i.e., on the 15th and

30th day of every month before the

concerned Police Station, till filing of the

charge-sheet;

(iv) The petitioners shall not threaten or

allure the prosecution witnesses.

Sd/-

JUDGE

sac*

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