SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sri Kiran Kumar M vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF AUGUST, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5128 OF 2018

BETWEEN

Sri. Kiran Kumar M.,
S/o. Late H.Pranesh Rao,
Aged about 29 years,
R/at No.738, 3rd Main,
9th B Cross, Pipe Line Road,
Near Kere Venkataramana Temple,
ISRO Layout, Bangalore-560078.
…Petitioner
(By Sri. N.Madesh, Advocate)

AND

State of Karnataka
By Kumar Swamy Layout Police
Bangalore City,
Rep. by State Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka
Bengaluru-560 001
…Respondent
(By Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the
event of his arrest in Crime No.252/2018 of Kumaraswamy
Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence
punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 509,
2

354(A), 354(c) and 307 read with 149 of IPC and Sections
3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day,
the court made the following:

ORDER

This petition is under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The

respondent police have registered a case in

Cr.No.252/2018 in relation to offences punishable under

Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506, 509, 354A, 354C and 307

read with Section 149 IPC.

2. Heard the petitioner’s counsel and the High Court

Government Pleader.

3. The complainant is non other than the wife of the

petitioner. Their marriage took place on 23.02.2017 at

Bengaluru. There are allegations that the petitioner

demanded dowry at the time of marriage. His demand

was satisfied, but he was not happy with the dowry given

to him. There are allegations that the petitioner is

homosexual and when the complainant came to know
3

about this, he used to quarrel with her and torture her.

Being unable to bear the torture, the complainant left the

marital home and went to her parents house.

4. The investigation papers show that the wife also

gave a statement before the Magistrate under Section 164

Cr.P.C. detailing the ill-treatment meted out to her and

also the attitude of the petitioner. Therefore in the light of

the allegations made against the petitioner, I do not think

that complaint is false one. There are no grounds to grant

anticipatory bail. Petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

sd

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