SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sri Syed Mujahid vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 June, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3911 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

SRI SYED MUJAHID
S/O LATE GULZAR,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
R/AT 1ST CROSS, ANEPALYA,
NEELASANDRA,
BENGALURU-560047. … PETITIONER

(BY SRI:M.R. NANJUNDA GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

AND

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY PSI WOMEN POLICE STATION KOLAR,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
BENGALURU-560001. … RESPONDENT

(BY SRI: S.VISHWA MURTHY, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.7/2018 OF
KOLAR WOMEN POLICE STATION, KOLAR DISTRICT FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 5(L)(6) OF
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCE ACT,
SECTION 9 AND 10 OF CHILD MARRIAGE RESTRAINT ACT,
SECTIONS 3, 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT AND SECTIONS
376(2),498(A),506 R/W 149 OF IPC.
2

THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

This petition is filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C.,

2. The case is registered under sections 5(L), 6 of

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Sections

9 and 10 of Child Marriage Restraint Act, Sections 3 and 4 of

Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and under sections 376(2), 498A,

506 and 149 of Indian Penal Code, based on the complaint

lodged by the wife of the petitioner. It is alleged that when the

complainant was 14 years old, the petitioner committed sexual

assault on her. Thereafter, she was forced into marriage in

violation of the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929. At the time of

performance of the marriage, dowry was demanded and it was

paid to the petitioner. It is further alleged that the petitioner

has been ill-treating and harassing her and subjecting her to

physical and mental cruelty in the matrimonial home.

3. The petitioner has been in custody since 12.04.2018

and substantial investigation having been completed, the

custody of the petitioner is not required to be extended any
3

further. Various allegations made against the petitioner are

required to be substantiated during trial.

4. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed.

a) Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on
furnishing a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the
likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional
court.

b) Petitioner shall appear before the court as and
when required.

c) Petitioner shall not threaten or allure the
prosecution witnesses in whatsoever manner.

d) Petitioner shall not get involved in similar
offences.

e) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the

Trial Court without prior permission of the Trial

Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE
*mn/-

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 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