IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6264 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
M.Chandrashekara @ Shekara S/o. Late Dundaiahna Madaiah, Aged about 42 years, R/at Basavaiahna Keri, Gangamathada Beedi, Malavalli Town, Mandya District-571 430. ...Petitioner (By Sri.R.V.Rajashekara, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka by its Station House Officer, Malavalli Town Police, Mandya-571 430.
Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru-560 001. ...Respondent (By Sri.K.P.Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.82/2018 (C.C.No.52/2018) of Malavalli Town Police Station, Mandya District for the offence punishable under Section 498A and 302 of IPC.
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 petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on regular bail in Crime No.82/2018 of Malavalli Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The brief facts of the complaint is that petitioner/accused No.1 since one year used to quarrel with the deceased-Gangavathi alleging that the deceased-Gangavathi is having illicit intimacy with another person and the petitioner used to torture the deceased physically and mentally. On 30.03.2018, at about 9.00 P.M., the deceased had a talk in the house of the accused with one Manu. The accused suspected and watched the talk and doubted the deceased fidelity. Thereafter, quarrel took place at about 4.00 A.M. On 31.03.2018, the accused took a nylon saree strangulated herself to death. On that basis, case was registered.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there are no eye witnesses to the alleged incident. As the deceased was having illicit relationship with one Manu and when the same was objected by the petitioner/accused No.1, the deceased has committed suicide by hanging. He further submits that in the postmortem report, there are no external injuries apart from strangulation mark. He further submits that charge sheet has been filed and the petitioner/accused No.1 is no more required for further investigation and interrogation. He further submits that he is ready to abide by the conditions imposed 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.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 illtreated and harassed the deceased on the date of alleged incident. He strangulated her by hanging with nylon saree and in order to conceal himself from the offence, which made her to die, he is showing that it is a suicide. He further submits that the alleged offence is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. If the petitioner/accused No.1 is released on bail, he may abscond and may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and other materials, which has been produced along with the petition.
7. As could be seen from the postmortem report, the Doctor has opined that death was due to asphyxia as a result of ligature strangulation. The alleged incident has taken place in the house of the accused and under what circumstances, the alleged incident has took place is not specifically stated by the accused. As could be seen from the records, earlier to the alleged incident, galata has taken place and same has been specified. Thereafter, death of the decased- Gangavathi has taken place. There is ample material to show that the petitioner/accused No.1 has committed the offence which is punishable with death or imprisonment of life. Whether petitioner/accused No.1 is involved or not is going to be held after detailed trial. At this stage, without discussing in detail regarding the material, prima facie an inference can be drawn in this behalf that too when second offence has taken place inside the house to point to the petitioner/accused No.1. There are no good grounds to release the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail. Hence, the petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE UN