1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8309/2017
BETWEEN:
Sri Santhosh
S/o Yellegowda
Aged about 33 years
R/at Ramakrupa Nilaya
No.6031, Somojirao Layout
Vijayanagara
Nelamangala Town
Nelamangala Taluk
Bengaluru Rural District-562 13. … PETITIONER
(By Sri D S Mali Patil, Adv.)
AND:
State by Hiriyuru Town Police Station
Hiriyuru
Represented by its
State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
Bangalore-562 13. …RESPONDENT
(By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event
of his arrest in Cr.No.172/2017 of Hiriyuru Town P.S.,
2
Chitradurga for the offences P/U/S 498(A) 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 filed by the petitioner/accused
No.1 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory
bail, to direct the respondent-police to release the
petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the
offences punishable under Sections 498A of IPC and
sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered
in respondent police station Crime No.172/2017.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner/accused No.1 and also the
learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for
the respondent-State.
3
3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail
petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on
record.
4. The wife of the petitioner is the complainant.
She has stated that her father performed her marriage
by spending Rs.12,00,000/- and thereafter, when she
had been to her husband’s house, he has not lead
happy marital life with her and was unnecessarily
picking up quarrel and giving ill-treatment and
harassment to her and was also assaulting her. Even
though it is brought to the notice of her mother-in-law,
instead of advising the petitioner, she too was ill-
treating her both physically and mentally and were
teasing her that she had not begotten children and
insisting her to go to hospital for treatment. Further,
the accused persons were insisting the complainant to
bring Rs.2,00,000/- from her parental place. On the
4
basis of said complaint, case was registered for the
alleged offences.
5. The petitioner has denied all the allegations in
the petition contending that there is false implication.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
other accused persons have been already granted bail
by the order of the learned Sessions Judge. Even
looking to the complaint averments no specific
allegations are made and it is vaguely stated that both
of them were abusing her in filthy language. The
offences alleged are not exclusively punishable with
death or imprisonment for life. Petitioner has
undertaken to abide by any reasonable conditions to be
imposed by this Court. Hence, I am of the opinion that
petitioner can be granted with anticipatory bail.
5
6. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The
respondent-police are directed to enlarge the petitioner
on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences
punishable under Sections 498A of IPC and sections 3
and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered in
respondent police station Crime No.172/2017, subject
to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal
bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and
shall furnish one surety for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the
arresting authority.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of
the prosecution witnesses, directly or
indirectly.
iii. Petitioner shall make himself available
before the Investigating Officer for
interrogation, as and when called for
and to cooperate with the further
investigation.
iv. Petitioner shall appear before the
concerned Court within 30 days from
the date of this order and to execute
6the personal bond and the surety
bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE
bkp