IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8671/2018 BETWEEN:
Adil Shariff @ Adil Ahmed S/o Ezaaz Ahmed, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Mechanic in a Private Mechanic Shop, R/at II Cross, Park Road, Viajayanagara Extension, Hassan-573 201. ...Petitioner (By Sri K. A. Chandrashekara, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka By the Police of Pension Mohalla Police Station, Hassan-573 201.
Rept. by SPP, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.269/2018 of Pension Mohalla Police Station, Hassan District for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B, 506 read with 149 of IPC and also under Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has sustained dislocation of his left shoulder and he has to undergo for treatment immediately in the hospital, as such, the said case is taken out of the turn.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.269/2018 of Pension Mohalla Police Station, Hassan for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B, 506 read with 149 of IPC and also under Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
4. The gist of the complaint is that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the petitioner- accused No.1 about five months prior to the date of the complaint. At the time of marriage, some gold ornaments along with house hold articles worth Rs.2,00,000/- were given. Subsequently, after the marriage, accused persons started ill-treating the deceased both physically and mentally and demanded an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- as additional dowry. The petitioner-accused No.1 started suspecting the deceased and when she became pregnant, he suspected her fidelity and because of the said harassment, an altercation took place on 29.09.2018 and a complaint was registered. On 31.10.2018, the deceased committed suicide by consuming the poison. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that already accused Nos.2 to 7 have been released on bail, on the ground of parity, the petitioner- accused No.1 is also entitled to be released on bail. It is further submitted that the deceased herself was not interested to stay with the petitioner. On 29.09.2018, when the petitioner asked her to come and sleep along with him, she tried to strangulate him and a complaint was registered in Crime No.259/2018. After a month, she committed suicide by consuming the poison in her parental house. It is further submitted that after 29.09.2018, she started residing in her parental house, there was no communication and no interaction between the deceased and the petitioner-accused No.1. He further submitted that the complaint itself clearly goes to show that because of her own reasons, as she did not want to be a burden to her parents for the purpose of litigation or any other reason, she committed suicide by consuming the poison. He further submitted that Section 304B of IPC is not attracted, as there was no ill-treatment or harassment made by the petitioner- accused No.1 at the time of her death. No incriminating material has been produced to show that the petitioner- accused No.1 has ill-treated or harassed the deceased, and due to that, she has committed suicide by consuming the poison. Further, he submitted that the petitioner-accused No.1 is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner-accused No.1 on bail.
6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that at the time of marriage, huge dowry and gold ornaments were given and subsequently, the petitioner-accused No.1 started demanding Rs.10,00,000/- as additional dowry. The deceased was harassed mentally and physically and due to which, she committed suicide by consuming the poison. It is his further submission that the petitioner was suspecting fidelity of the deceased. There is ample material to connect the petitioner to the alleged crime. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
7. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and other materials, which has been produced in this behalf and the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties.
8. By going through the contents of the complaint and other materials, it indicates that there are serious allegations of cruelty committed by the petitioner-accused No.1 on the deceased. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner-accused No.1 has not made out any good ground to release him on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, criminal petition stands dismissed.
However, the petitioner-accused No.1 is at liberty to file for regular bail application after surrender, in that event, the above observation will not come in the way for consideration of the said application.
Sd/- JUDGE RB