IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.6672/2019 Between:
Manjunath V., S/o Late Venkatesh, Aged about 37 years, R/at No.64/1, 2nd Main, 7th Cross, Opp: Ravinandana Schoo, Kaveriura, Kamakshipalya, Basaveshwaranagar, Bengaluru – 560 079. … Petitioner (By Sri. Jaya Prakash B., Advocate) And:
The State of Karnataka Madanayakanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru.
Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Complex, Bengaluru – 560 001.
(By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) … Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.155/2019 of Madanayakanahally P.S., Bengaluru for the offences p/u/s 498A, 306 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER Petitioner who is the sole accused in Crime No.155/2019 is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the complaint lodged with respect to the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. The complaint has been filed stating that the petitioner and the deceased were married and from the said wedlock they have two children. It is further stated that the brother of the deceased had lodged a complaint stating that his sister had committed suicide and that the petitioner was responsible for the same and the death of the petitioner’s wife was solely due to the harassment for dowry by the petitioner and also the acts of cruelty inflicted upon the deceased.
3. It is noticed that the petitioner had been arrested on 22.08.2019 and has been in custody since then. It is also to be noticed that charge sheet has been filed after investigation.
4. The prosecution relies upon the death note.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the veracity of the death note has not been established nor has the death note been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory to examine and give report as regards to whether death note is in the hand writing of the deceased. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the complaint makes out a case of harassment for dowry, the death note does not contain any such allegation. It is further contended that the complaint is by the brother of the deceased which though makes out other allegations, prima-facie there is discrepancy in the death note on which the prosecution relies to be main evidence to nail the accused, and the version in the complaint.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the prosecution has opposed the grant of bail and contends that the petitioner was absconding after the dismissal of his application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking grant of anticipatory bail and that prima facie case is made out as against the petitioner and the son of the deceased has also in his statement implicated the petitioner.
7. Taking note of the fact that the petitioner is working as an employee in BMTC and that investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed, question as to whether the acts of the petitioner resulted in driving the deceased to commit suicide is a matter to be established during trial. The veracity of the death note and its contents is a matter to be proved and established during trial as per law. Present proceedings cannot be construed to be punitive in nature. Also taking note that he is an employee of government undertaking, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
8. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No. 155/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his attendance before the concerned Station House Officer, once in a month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till conclusion of the trial (iv) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(v) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(vi) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE VP