SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vishwanath S/O Sakaram Sindhe vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 January, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201537/2019

Between:

Vishwanath S/o Sakaram Sindhe
Age: 43 years
Occ: Computer Repair Business
R/o Tajsultanpur Village
Tq: Dist: Kalaburagi
Now R/o Janatha Nagar Layout
Near Sindagi Ambabhavani Temple
Kalaburagi – 585 102
… Petitioner

(By Sri Khaleeph M., Advocate for
Smt. Shridevi B., Advocates)

And:

The State of Karnataka
Brahmpur Police Station
Kalaburagi
Represented by SPP
High Court of Karnataka at
Kalaburagi Bench – 585 103
… Respondent

(By Sri P.S. Patil, HCGP)
Crl.P.No.201537/2019
2

This criminal petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C., praying to release the petitioner on bail in Crime
No.41/2019 (S.C.No.104/2019) of Brahmpur, P.S., Dist:
Kalaburagi, for the offences P/U/Sec.498A 302 of IPC,
pending before the V Addl. Dist Sessions Judge,
Kalaburagi.

This petition coming on for orders, this day, the
Court made the following:

ORDER

The petitioner has sought for his enlargement on

bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure in S.C.No.104/2019 pending before the V

Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi Court

for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and

302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for brevity

referred to as `IPC’).

2. The summary of the case of the

prosecution is that on 09.04.2019 between 10.00 to

11.00 a.m. the accused caused the murder of his wife

in his house by assaulting her with cricket bat on her

head and on other parts of the body. The motive
Crl.P.No.201537/2019
3

attributed is that he was suspecting the character of

his wife. The charge sheet for the offences punishable

under Sections 498(A) and 302 of IPC has been filed

against the accused/petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner while

reiterating the contention taken up by the petitioner in

the petition submitted that the petitioner is innocent

of the alleged incident and he has two small children

to take care of. The learned counsel also submitted

that the petitioner is ready to abide by the conditions

that may be imposed by this Court.

4. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader who has filed statement of objection has

opposed the petition stating that the Medical Report

also supports the case of the prosecution that due to

the assault, the deceased died.

Crl.P.No.201537/2019
4

5. A perusal of the material placed before this

Court at this stage and prima facie would go to show

that the complainant is none else than the mother of

the deceased, as such, she is mother-in-law of the

accused/petitioner. In her complaint itself at the very

first instance, she has stated that though she rushed

to the rescue of her daughter, however, the injury was

so serious that she succumbed to the injury on the

spot. By that time, the accused also ran away form

the house. Added to that, the charge sheet also

shows CWs.6, 7 and 8 were also eyewitnesses to the

incident. Therefore, when the charge sheet clearly

shows that the complainant was the eyewitness to the

incident and three more independent eyewitnesses to

the alleged incident have stated that they have

witnessed the said incident, I am of the view that, at

this stage and prima face there are no grounds for

enlarging the petitioner on bail.

Crl.P.No.201537/2019
5

However, surprisingly the prosecution has not

whispered anything about the presence of the

eyewitnesses to the incident in its statement of

objection. In a very casual manner, it has filed its

statement of objection. Even in the argument also

surprisingly the learned High Court Government

Pleader did not whisper about the presence of the

eyewitnesses at the time of the alleged incident.

6. In view of the above reasoning, since the

charge sheet material shows the presence of the

eyewitnesses to the alleged incident which alleges the

crime as heinous in nature, I am of the view that the

petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE
Srt

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 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