SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Yogesh vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 March, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1411/2018
BETWEEN:

Yogesh
S/o Devegowda,
Aged about 26 years
No.570, 1st cross,
Near Kattriguppe water Tank,
BSK 3rd stage,
Bangalore 560098.
… Petitioner

(By Smt.N.Padmavathi, Advocate)

AND:

The State of Karnataka
By Channammanakere
Achu Kattu Police Station,
Bengaluru – 560 098
Represented by
Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka,
Bengaluru – 560 001. … Respondent

(By Sri S.Vishwa Murthy, HCGP)
2

This Criminal Petition is filed under section 439 of
Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime
No.362/2017 of Channammanakere Achu Kattu Police
Station, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under
Section 304(B) and 498A r/w section 34 of IPC.

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

ORDER

Heard the petitioner’s counsel and the learned HCGP

for respondent-State.

2. This petition is under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

Petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.362/2017 registered

at the respondent-police station for the offence punishable

under Section 304(B) and 498(A) read with 34 of IPC.

3. The complaint was made by Kavya P. sister of

the deceased namely Pavithra. The complaint discloses

that deceased Pavithra was given in marriage to the

petitioner. There is an allegation that at the time of

marriage, this petitioner and his parents demanded for

dowry and even after the marriage, the accused used to

torture deceased by putting forward demand for dowry.
3

There used to take place quarrel very often in the house.

Therefore, the deceased used to come back to her parents

house and live there for some time. At last, after some

conciliation, it appears that the deceased went back to the

house of the accused. On 01.10.2017 at about 2.30 p.m.,

the complainant received a call from this petitioner and

came to know that Pavithra had committed suicide by

hanging herself.

4. The Petitioner’s counsel submits that if the

statement of mother of the deceased is read, it can be

very much said that there was no demand for dowry. Most

of the time, the deceased used to live with her parents

even after the marriage and this petitioner used to bring

back his wife to his house. The entire allegations are

against the other accused and not against this petitioner.

The other accused are released on bail. Therefore this

petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail.

5. As rightly submitted by the petitioner’s counsel,

the statement given by the mother of the deceased does
4

not disclose any demand for dowry at the time of

marriage. Rather what is stated by her is that, some

quarrel that used to take place in the house and for this

reason, the deceased used to come back to her parents’

house. The statement also discloses that the petitioner

used to bring back his wife to his house. Therefore, very

reading of the complaint and statement of the mother of

the accused show that allegations leveled against this

petitioner require trial and at this stage, prima-facie

materials regarding involvement of this petitioner in the

death of his wife are not forthcoming. The other accused

are also released on bail. Charge sheet is also filed.

Therefore, this petitioner can be admitted to bail by

subjecting him to stringent conditions. Hence, the

following:

ORDER

Petition is allowed.

Petitioner shall be released on bail in
connection with Crime No.362/2017 registered
by Channamanakere Achu Kattu Police Station,
5

on his executing a bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) and
providing two sureties for the likesum to the
satisfaction of the trial Court. The petitioner is
also subjected to the following conditions:

i. He shall provide his address proof before
the trial Court;

ii. He shall not directly or indirectly influence
the witnesses. Any complaint by any of the
witnesses against the petitioner that, he has
made an attempt to influence them or
persuade them to give false evidence, shall
be viewed seriously by the trial Court;

iii. He shall not tamper with the evidence
collected by the investigating officer;

iv. He shall appear before the Court regularly
for trial, without fail.

Sd/-

JUDGE
mr

Leave a Reply

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

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