IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9645/2018 BETWEEN:
Mohammed Samiulla S/o Mohammed Anwar, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Proprietor, M/s Inosys Technologies, R/at # 18/1, 3rd Main, 15th Cross, Lakkasandra, Bengaluru – 560 030.
(By Sri C.H. Jadhav, Senior counsel for Sri. K. Ram Singh, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka by Adugodi Police Station, Bengaluru – 560 030.
Rep. by Government Pleader, High Court of Karnataka, ...Petitioner Bengaluru – 560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.272/2018 of Adugodi Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 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 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking his release on bail in Crime No.272/2018 of Adugodi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of IPC.
2. I have heard Sri. C.H. Jadhav, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri.M. Divakar Maddur, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. Gist of the complaint is that the daughter of the complainant got married with the accused on 07.09.2017. Thereafter, they were residing at Shoba Apartments, Bannerghatta. As the character of the petitioner was not good, there was quarrel between the daughter of the complainant and the accused petitioner. It is further alleged that the complainant came to know the fact that earlier, the petitioner got married subsequently, obtained divorce and thereafter, got married to the complainant’s daughter. It is further alleged that the complainant and his family members were restrained from visiting the house of the petitioner and also restrained from calling the daughter of the complainant and there was ill-treatment and harassment. The said factor was pacified by the elder members. It is further alleged that after 40 days i.e., on 27.10.2018 at about 5.30 p.m., the accused petitioner intentionally pushed the deceased from second floor. Due to the injuries, the deceased succumbed to death on the same day at about 8.25 p.m., at Victoria Hospital. On the basis of the complaint, a case came to be registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that the complaint filed on 28.10.2018, does not make any allegation either demand of dowry or ill-treatment and harassment. Even though there is some allegation, the allegation is only minor and an altercation has taken place, which will take place in the family. It is further submitted that when the Tahsildar has recorded the unnatural death therein in question No.27, he has mentioned that there is no suspicion for having committed the crime and there is no suspicion against anybody. It is submitted that after two days of the incident, the voluntary statement has been recorded and the complaint has been registered stating a new story that the accused pushed the deceased and committed the murder of the deceased. It is further submitted that the voluntary statement of the accused petitioner clearly go to show that it is an accidental death and the accused petitioner is nothing to do with the same and he was not having any intention or he is not involved in the alleged crime. Immediately he has informed the parents and took the injured to the hospital. The said conduct clearly goes to show that the accused was not the person who has caused the said act. He is ready to abide by the conditions imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer the surety. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the statement of Smt. Shaheena Taj and Bibi Ameena and other witnesses clearly go to show that on 16.09.2018 the accused had ill-treated and harassed. It is further submitted that there was sufficient material to show that everyday he used to harass the deceased both physically and mentally and unnecessarily he used to quarrel with the deceased. In that context, he took the accused to the second floor and from there he pushed with an intention to kill her. As a result of the injuries, the deceased succumbed to death. The said act clearly goes to show that the accused with an intention to cause the death of the deceased, has pushed her from the second floor and the said offence is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. He further submitted that there is consistency in the statement of the deceased and the neighbors. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by both the learned counsel appearing for the parties and during the course of arguments, the charge sheet material was also made available and I have carefully and cautiously gone through the charge sheet materials.
7. As could be seen from the contents of the complaint, it indicates that the complaint has been filed on 28.10.2018 there is no other allegation to show that there was demand of dowry and the other materials indicates that there is one word that the minor altercation has taken place between the husband and wife and they also advised in this behalf. Even as could be seen from the said compliant, the compliant has filed only with a suspicion against the accused petitioner and while filing the complaint, it is not stated that it is the petitioner, who pushed the deceased from second floor and caused the injuries with an intention to kill her. Even the statement which has been recorded by the Tahsildar therein, it is only suspicion has been expressed. On scrutiny of the entire charge sheet material in indicates that it is only on the basis of suspicion the said complaint has been registered. If really there was an ill-treatment and harassment as contended, immediately when they received the phone call at about 5.30 p.m., they would have lodged a compliant against him. But the complaint was lodged at about 10.50 p.m. on the same day, but the said allegations have not been made in this behalf. Looking from any angle there is only suspicion about the case, whether it is an accidental death or an intentional death? The said fact has to be considered and appreciated only at the time of trial but not at this pre- mature stage. Already the charge sheet has been filed and the custodial continuation of the petitioner is not necessary. The trial may take some more time. In that light, I feel that by imposing some stringent conditions, if the accused petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice. In the light of discussions held by me above, petition is allowed.
8. Petitioner/accused is enlarged on bail in Crime No.272/2018 of Adugodi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
3. He shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e., 1st of every month between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police station, till the trial is concluded.
4. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
Sd/- JUDGE VBS