1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
CRIMINAL PETITION No.2372/2019
Between:
T. Vishnuvardhana Reddy,
Aged about 36 years,
S/o T. Venkatarama Reddy,
R/at G-3, Faida Farms Apartment,
Belatturu Village,
Kadugodi,
Bengaluru – 560 067. … Petitioner
(By Sri M.T. Nanaiah, Senior Counsel for
Sri MRC Manohar, Advocate)
And:
The State of Karnataka by,
Kadugodi Police Station,
Bengaluru,
Rep. by State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Complex,
Bangalore – 560 001. … Respondent
(By Sri S. Rachaiah, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the
Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.
No.292/2018 of Kadugodi Police Station, Bangalore City for the
offences p/u/s 304B and 498A of SectionIPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the
Court, made the following:
2
ORDER
Petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in
connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings
in Crime No.292/2018 for the offences punishable under
Sections 304B, Section498A of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the
informant who is the father of the deceased had lodged a
complaint stating that he had celebrated the marriage of
the deceased along with the petitioner on 26.02.2012. It is
stated that at the time of marriage, an amount of
Rs.10,00,000/- with 450 Gms. of gold was given as dowry.
It is alleged that the petitioner was misbehaving with the
daughter of the informant and there were allegedly
demands for additional dowry. It is stated that on
15.09.2018, petitioner and his wife had come to the house
of the informant and the petitioner is stated to have
demanded a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- towards additional
dowry. It comes out that on 01.10.2018 information was
3
given to the informant that his daughter had died. On the
basis of the alleged incident, complaint was filed, FIR is
registered, investigation is complete and charge sheet has
been filed. It is stated that the petitioner has been in
custody since 09.03.2019 till date.
3. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submits that the version of the mother and
the sister of the deceased when their statements were
recorded during the inquest proceedings by the Tahsildar
are at variance with the version of the informant in the
present complaint. It is stated that before the Tahsildar no
allegations of harassment as regards dowry has been
made out, whereas in the present complaint by the
informant filed on 03.11.2018 allegations of harassment
in connection with the demands for dowry had been made
out. It is pointed out that proof of offence is a matter for
trial and the present proceedings cannot be treated to be
punitive in nature.
4
4. Taking note of the fact that the investigation is
complete and charge sheet is filed, question as to whether
the acts of harassment by the petitioner had led the
deceased to commit suicide is a matter to be proved
during trial. Taking note of the fact that the investigation
is complete and that the petitioner is an employee of John
F Welch Technology Centre and noting that the present
proceedings cannot be considered to be proceedings for
punishment, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
5. Accordingly, the bail petition filed by the
petitioner under Sec. 439 of SectionCr.P.C. is allowed and the
petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.292/2018 for
the offences punishable under Sections 304B, Section498A of IPC
and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, subject to the
following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal
bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh
only) with one surety for the likesum to
the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
5
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for
the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with
evidence, influence in any way any
witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the
petitioner to inform the same to the
concerned SHO.
(v) Any violation of the aforementioned
conditions by the petitioner, shall result
in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as
an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VP