-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5094/2019
BETWEEN:
Sri Muddana Venkata Ramesh
S/o Satyanarayana
Aged about 32 years
No.171, 5th Main, B.Narayanapura,
Bengaluru-36.
…Petitioner
(By Sri J.R.Shanthala, Advocate)
AND:
State by Mahadevapura Police Station
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Bengaluru-560 001.
…Respondent
(By Sri M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime
No.167/2018 (C.C.No.53917/2019) of Mahadevapura
Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offences punishable
under Sections 498A and Section304B r/w. Section 34 of IPC and
Sections 3 and Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day,
the Court made the following:-
-2-
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/
accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to enlarge him
on bail in Crime No.167/2018 (S.C.No.1152/2019) of
Mahadevapura Police Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 498(A) and Section304(B) r/w Section 34 of Indian
Penal Code and also under Sections 3 and Section4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner/accused No.1 and the learned High Court
Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The brief facts of the case as per the complaint are
that the daughter of complainant, viz., Tulasi Mahalakshmi
was given in marriage to Muddanna Venkata Ramesh
(accused No.1) on 16.03.2017 and subsequently, on
19.01.2018, she committed suicide by hanging herself in
the house of her husband and in the light of the same, a
complaint was registered in UDR No.15/2018. Thereafter,
-3-
the father of deceased filed a complaint alleging that
deceased committed suicide because of the ill-treatment
and harassment caused by the accused persons for
demand of dowry. On the basis of the said complaint, a
case was registered in Crime No.167/2018 for the above
said offences.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner/accused No.1 that the marriage of the deceased
and the petitioner/accused took place on 16.3.2017 and
thereafter they shifted to Bengaluru and at the time when
they shifted to Bengaluru, the jewellary which was given in
the marriage has been taken over by the parents of the
deceased. It is her further submission that the alleged
incident has taken place on 19.1.2018 and at the time
when the Tahasildar recorded the statement of Vinayaka-
the brother of the deceased, he has categorically stated in
his statement before the Tahasildar that the
petitioner/accused and the deceased were residing
cordially and deceased sister used to call him every day
-4-
over the phone and they were happily leading the life and
petitioner/accused was also look after well and she has
been put for IT training. He has also stated that because of
frustration she has committed suicide without telling to the
husband of the deceased and they are not suspecting
anybody and they requested to give the dead body after
post mortem and thereafter they conducted the last rituals
and the complaint has been registered only on 22.2.2018.
It is her further submission that when UDR case was
registered there was no allegation of either demand of
dowry or any gold, but subsequently after deliberation and
discussion a false complaint has been registered. It is her
further submission that earlier the petitioner/accused has
approached this Court for release him on bail, but this
Court has given a liberty to file a fresh bail application after
the charge sheet is filed. Now the charge sheet has been
filed and all the material which has been collected is made
available and in the said material there is no allegation as
against the petitioner/accused for having demanded the
-5-
dowry. He is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed
by this Court and ready to offer the sureties. On these
grounds she prayed to allow the petition and to release the
petitioner on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government
Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the
complainant is the father of the deceased, in his statement
he has specifically made the allegation that prior to the
marriage there was a demand and in pursuance of the
same he has given huge gold and cash and thereafter there
was ill-treatment and harassment caused by the
petitioner/accused and the deceased has committed
suicide by hanging in the house of the petitioner/accused
and the petitioner/accused has not given any explanation
as contemplated under Section 106 of the Evidence Act. It
is his further submission that there is a presumption that
if the death takes place within seven years after the
marriage, it is presumed to be a dowry death. He further
submitted that the petitioner/accused was absconding and
-6-
subsequently he was surrendered before the Court. On
these grounds he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the
submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for
the parties and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the charge sheet material, the
statement of Vinayaka- the brother of the deceased has
been recorded on 22.2.2018 and therein he has stated that
the petitioner/accused and the deceased are living
cordially and every day she used to call and they were
living happily and she also used to inform that the
petitioner/accused is also looking after well and he has put
her for IT training and she is going for the training and he
has also further stated that he is not suspecting anybody.
Even the records also indicate the fact that the deceased
died due to frustration and the post mortem report also
supports the contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioner/accused.
-7-
8. Though it is contended by the learned High Court
Government Pleader that the presumption is there under
the law and the accused has not come up with any
explanation as contemplated under Section 106 of the
Evidence Act, even the statement of the brother of the
deceased itself goes to show that she was prejudiced
because of pressure of work and as such she has
committed suicide and as on the date of the alleged
incident the petitioner/accused was also not present in the
house. Under the said facts and circumstances that too
when already charge sheet has been filed, I feel that by
imposing some stringent conditions, if the
petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on bail, it is
going to meet the ends of justice.
9. In the light of the discussions held by me above,
the petition is allowed and petitioner/accused No.1 is
ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.167/2018(SC
No.1152/2019) of Mahadevapura police station for the
-8-
offences punishable under Sections 498A, Section304B r/w
Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and Section4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act, subject to the following
conditions:
i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond
for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two
Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum
to the satisfaction of the trial Court..
ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence directly or indirectly.
iii) He shall mark his attendance in the
jurisdictional police once in a month on every
first between 10.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M. till
the trial is concluded.
iv) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court
without prior permission.
Sd/-
JUDGE
*AP/-