SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sri Manjunatha vs State By on 11 September, 2018

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5497/2018

BETWEEN :

Sri Manjunatha
S/o late Jayaramappa
Aged about 33 years
R/at Kolathur Village, Hoskote Taluk,
Bangalore Rural District-562 114.
… Petitioner
(By Sri C.R. Raghavendra Reddy, Advocate)

AND :

State by
Hoskote Police Station
Represented by SPP, High Court
Bangalore-01
… Respondent
(By Sri K.P. Yoganna, 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.173/2018 of Hosakote
Police Station, Bangalore District for the offences
punishable under Sections 302, 304B, 498A r/w Section
34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act.
-2-

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

ORDER

The present petition is filed under Section 438 of

Cr.P.C. by accused No.1 praying to grant anticipatory bail

in Crime No.173/2018 of Hosakote Police Station for the

offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B, 302 r/w.

Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that deceased

Gangothri, the daughter of the complainant was given in

marriage to the first accused-petitioner herein about five

years back by giving some dowry and in the said

wedlock, a male child was born. After the marriage,

accused-petitioner was not properly looking after the

deceased. He was ill-treating and harassing her both

physically and mentally and the same was informed by

the deceased to the complainant and the same was
-3-

pacified and she was consoled and asked her to lead her

life. On 17.3.2018 at about 9.00 p.m. it was informed

that the deceased Gangothri committed suicide by

hanging herself. On the basis of the said complaint, a

case was registered.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-

State.

4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for

the petitioner that prior to the death of the deceased, no

complaints were registered as against the accused-

petitioner and there was no ill-treatment caused by the

petitioner as against the deceased. He further submitted

that the petitioner is having two years’ son and nobody is

there to look after the said child. Even the petitioner is

having aged mother who is also suffering with certain

ailments. At the time of the alleged incident, petitioner

was not there in the house. He further submitted that
-4-

the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be

imposed by this Court and ready to offer the sureties.

On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition by

enlarging the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

5. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently argued

by contending that since from the date of registration of

the case, he is absconding and he is not available for

investigation and interrogation. He further submitted

that the death of the deceased Gangothri has been taken

place within seven years after the marriage and it is a

dowry death. He further submitted that the petitioner

has not explained as to under what circumstances the

deceased has committed suicide in his house. There is a

prima facie material as against the petitioner and if he is

enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution

evidence and he may not be available for trial. On these

grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
-5-

6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the

contents of the complaint and other material on record.

It is not in dispute that the death of the deceased has

taken place within seven years after her marriage in the

house of the accused-petitioner. When this Court made

an enquiry with the learned counsel for the petitioner, he

submitted that as per the statement of Girijamma, the

deceased committed suicide by hanging herself because

of severe head ache. As per Section 106 of the Indian

Evidence Act, it is the petitioner-accused No.1 who has to

explain as to under what circumstances the alleged

incident has taken place in his house. The contents of

the complaint and other material would indicate that

there was ill-treatment and harassment caused to the

deceased and as a result of which, she committed suicide

by hanging herself. There appears to be some prima

facie material as against the accused-petitioner. Hence,

this is not a fit case to exercise the discretionary power

under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by this Court.
-6-

Accordingly, petition stands dismissed. However,

liberty is given to the petitioner to apply for fresh bail in

the event of his arrest.

Sd/-

JUDGE

*ck/-

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