IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2884/2019 Between:
Mohanakumara S/o. Krishne Gowda, Aged about 42 years, R/at Sulagodu Village, Kundruru Hobli, Alur Taluk, Hassan District 573 213.
… Petitioner (By Sri.Sharath Kumar H. N., Advocate) And:
The State of Karnataka Hassan Extension Police Station, Hassan District, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru 560 001.
(By Sri. S. Rachaiah, HCGP) …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to grant regular bail in Crime No.338/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 302 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, by Hassan Extension Police at Hassan on the file of the 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge at Hassan.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER Petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No. 338/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. The case of the prosecution is that a complaint came to be lodged on 07.11.2018 alleging commission of aforestated offence. It is alleged that the petitioner had married the deceased and that gold and cash were given at the time of marriage and initially though husband and wife lived in harmony, subsequently difference of opinion developed and it is alleged that the accused is stated to have had an illicit relationship with another lady. It is stated that there were frequent quarrels between the petitioner and the deceased. It is stated that on 07.11.2018 enquiry was made near the work place of Nandini. Subsequently, on seeing the complainant’s daughter lying dead in her house, complaint was lodged. FIR is registered. Investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that case rests on circumstantial evidence and the question as regards proof of offence is a matter for trial.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader states that circumstantial evidence is strong and the nature of injuries would indicate the manner in which the deceased was done to death and opposes grant of bail.
5. It is to be noticed that investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioner is in custody since 09.11.2018. The case of the prosecution rests on circumstantial evidence. Though the learned High Court Government Pleader states that circumstantial evidence is strong, however, these are matters to be proved during trial. Present proceedings cannot be construed to be proceedings for punishment. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as regards to the weight of evidence, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. 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. 338/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302 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 not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) 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