Karnataka High Court Venkataswamy S/O Ramabhovi vs The State Of Karnataka By on 8 May, 2014Author: A.V.Chandrashekara
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MAY 2014 BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2595/2014 BETWEEN:
VENKATASWAMY S/O RAMABHOVI
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/O NO.68, BHOVI COLONY
HASSAN DISTRICT-573121 … PETITIONER (BY SRI R B DESHPANDE, ADV.) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
HALEBEEDU POLICE STATION
HASSAN DISTRICT-573121 … RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER U/S.439 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR. NO.71/2014 OF HALEBEEDU P.S., HASSAN, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 307 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3 AND 4 OF D.P.ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER
Petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.71/2014 on the file of Halebeedu P.S. of Hassan District, for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 307 IPC read with Section 34 of IPC. Consequent upon the death of the wife of the petitioner, Sections 302 and 304(B) of IPC have been invoked.
2. Wife of the first accused committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her body and thereafter igniting herself. Her dying declaration has already been recorded and it discloses that her husband is responsible for her untimely death.
3. This Court has already granted bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in favour of Smt.Gangamma, the wife of the present petitioner. In paragraph-7 of the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.1946/2014, this Court has assigned reasons as to why bail had to be 3
granted in favour of Gangamma. The present petitioner also stands in the same position and hence he is also entitled to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions as imposed in Crl.P.No.1946/2014: i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) and furnish one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of concerned Court.
ii) He shall not intimate or tamper with prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii) He shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
4. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in releasing this petitioner will not come in the way of considering the bail application that may be moved on behalf of the husband and in such an event, appropriate orders could be passed by the learned Sessions Judge uninfluenced by the order of bail 4
granted by this Court in favour of Gangamma or this petitioner.