Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Krishnamurthy @ G Murthy @ Lakshminarasa And Others vs Areddy

High Court Of Karnataka|11 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.2524/2019 BETWEEN:
1. Krishnamurthy @ G. Murthy @ Lakshminarasa S/o Gangaiah Aged about 38 years 2. Smt. Rathnamma W/o Krishnamurthy @ G. Murthy @ Lakshminarasa Aged about 38 years Both are residing at Doddasarangi Village, Tumakuru Taluk & District-572 102. (By Sri R.V.Shivanandareddy, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka by Tumakuru Women Police Station Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court Complex Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Sri M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP) …Petitioners …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.58/2018 of Tumakuru Women Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 498A, 323, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioners/ accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to release them on anticipatory bail in Crime No.58/2018 of Women Police Station, Tumkuru, for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that already charge sheet has been filed and no allegations have been made under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. The only allegation which has been made as against the petitioners/accused is under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC and they are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. They are residing in a separate village and when the complainant went to ask about her husband, at that time the petitioners/accused have abused and threatened with life. The petitioners/accused are apprehending their arrest and if they re arrested the police is going to harass. Only with a mala fide intention, a false complaint has been registered. They are ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer the sureties. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioners on anticipatory bail.
4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioners/accused have abused and threatened with life to the complainant when she went to ask about her husband and thereby they had committed the offence.
They are absconding since from the date of arrest. Hence, they are not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, she prayed to dismiss the petition.
5. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
6. On close reading of the contents of the charge sheet material, as against the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 is concerned it has been alleged that when the complainant CW1 went to the village of the petitioners/accused on 18.4.2018 who are the brothers and sister of accused No.1 and when she asked about accused No.1 at that time they started quarreling and abused with filthy language and accused No.2 threatened with life. Except that no other allegation are there. Under the said facts and circumstances that too when already charge sheet has been filed, I feel that it is a fit case to release the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 on anticipatory bail.
7. In the light of the discussions held by me above, the petition is allowed and petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in Crime No.58/2018 of Women Police Station, Tumkuru, for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, subject to the following conditions.
i) Each of the petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
ii) They shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from today.
iii) They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iv) They shall mark their attendance in the jurisdictional police once in 15 days between 10.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M. till the trial is concluded.
v) They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
IA No.1/19 does not survive for consideration and the same is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE *AP/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Krishnamurthy @ G Murthy @ Lakshminarasa And Others vs Areddy

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
11 April, 2019
Judges
  • B A Patil