IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2018
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5099 OF 2018
S/o. Thangela Konda Reddy,
Aged about 28 years,
R/at No.1227, 43rd Cross,
5th Block, HBR Layout,
Kalyan Nagar Post
(By Sri.Vikas M., Advocate)
State of Karnataka
By Hennur Police Station
By State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building
(By Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner
on bail in Crime No.251/2017(S.C.No.1349/2017) of
Hennur Police Station, Bangalore, for the offence
punishable under Sections 498A, 304B read with 34 of IPC
and Sections 3, 4 of D.P. Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day,
the court made the following:
The petitioner is accused No.1 in S.C.No.1349/2017
on the file of Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru (CCH-72). The respondent police have
registered a case against the petitioner and other accused
for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B
read with Section 34 IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry
2. Heard the petitioner’s counsel and the learned
High Court Government Pleader.
3. The complainant is one D. Papireddy, father of the
deceased. The 1st accused i.e., the petitioner is the
husband of the deceased. Their marriage took place on
26.02.2016. Petitioner’s wife died on 07.07.2017. The
complaint discloses harassment meted out to the deceased
for additional dowry, and also there are allegations that
she was subjected to sexual harassment. The petitioner
herein moved this court seeking bail by filing
Crl.P.No.8419/2017. By the time he applied for bail,
investigation had been completed. This court after
perusing the charge sheet came to conclusion that there
were prima facie materials against the petitioner and
rejected the bail.
4. The learned counsel submits that another
accused i.e., the brother of the petitioner also applied for
bail. His petition was rejected and he approached the
Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Special Leave Petition
(criminal) No.4303/2018. He submits that since the
Hon’ble Supreme Court granted interim bail to accused
No.2, the petitioner herein i.e., Accused No.1 is also
entitled to be released on bail on parity ground.
5. It is to be stated that the Hon’ble Supreme Court
has not yet decided the Special Leave Petition. If interim
bail has been granted to accused No.2 by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court, I do not think parity can be applied.
Moreover when this court dismissed the petition
Crl.P.8419/2017, he did not approach the Supreme Court.
The petition does not disclose any other ground which
constitutes changed circumstance to admit him to bail.
Therefore petition is dismissed.