SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Yasin Shariff vs State on 10 July, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF JULY 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4241/2018

BETWEEN:

YASIN SHARIFF
S/O LATE JAKAULLA SHERIFF,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT SARAGURU VILLAGE,
CHAMRAJANAGAR TALUK,
CHAMRAJANAGAR-571 313.
…PETITIONER

(BY SRI VEERABHADRA SWAMY H.P., ADV.,)

AND:

STATE BY CHAMRAJNAGAR RURAL POLICE,
CHAMRAJNAGAR TALUK AND DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560 009.
… RESPONDENT

(BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
BAIL IN CRIME NO.2/2018 OF CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN
POLICE STATION, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 302 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3, 4 OF
D.P ACT.
2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR
ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner is accused of committing the

murder of his wife. The charge sheet is laid against him

under Sections 302 and 498A of IPC and Sections 3 and

4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner is in

custody since 03.01.2018.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing

for the respondent-State.

3. The learned HCGP has not filed any statement

of objections, but has orally opposed the bail petition.

4. The case of the prosecution is that the

petitioner herein married the deceased on 11.02.2012.

Differences having been cropped between them,

petitioner made a separate arrangement for the stay of

the deceased at Mysore along with the child. In the
3

meanwhile, she initiated a criminal proceedings against

him under the provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

However, the dispute between the parties came to be

settled and a compromise was arrived and the

proceedings were closed. Thereafter, the deceased and

the petitioner along with the child started residing in a

rented house at Chamarajanagar. On the fateful day on

01.01.2018, it is alleged that the parents of the

deceased were also in the house. After dinner all of

them went to sleep. But on the next day morning, the

petitioner and the child were not seen in the house. The

father of the deceased lodged a complaint before the

respondent-Police. In the course of investigation, the

petitioner was arrested on 03.01.2018 and a pillow used

for smothering the deceased was recovered. Based on

the above evidence, charge sheet is laid against the

petitioner.

4

5. The prosecution appears to have strongly relied

upon two circumstances namely disappearance of the

petitioner from the matrimonial house on the early

morning on 02.01.2018 and the arrest of the petitioner

three days thereafter. But the complaint is seen to have

lodged only at 2.00 pm on 02.01.2018.

6. Looking into the overall facts and

circumstances of the case, apart from the above two

circumstances, no other material is available in proof of

the offences alleged against the petitioner. Even with

regard to allegations of cruelty and dowry demand,

according to the prosecution, the dispute was

compromised between the parties on 09.12.2017 and

the incident has taken place within 10 or 12 days

thereafter. Therefore, the allegation made against the

petitioner require to be substantiated during the trial.

As the investigation is completed, I do not find it

necessary to extend the custody of the petitioner. The
5

child of the petitioner who was present at the time of

incident is not cited as a witness. Therefore, there

cannot be any apprehension of the petitioner either

threatening the witnesses or tampering with the

evidence at this stage. Accordingly, the criminal

petition is allowed.

a) Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on
bail on obtaining a bond in a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only)
with two sureties for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the trial 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; and
6

e) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction
of the Trial Court without prior
permission of the Trial Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE

PB

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh