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

Santhosh Kumar vs Rashekara K A

High Court Of Karnataka|26 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7933/2019 BETWEEN:
Santhosh Kumar S/o Siddaiah Aged about 32 years R/at No.115, 2nd Cross Nelamangala Town Bengaluru District – 572 123 (By Sri Manjegowda, Advocate for Sri Chandrashekara K A, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka by The Police of Nelamangala Town Police Station Bengaluru District – 572 123 Represented by its State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru – 560 001 (By Sri Honnappa, HCGP) …Petitioner …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.112/2019 of Nelamangala Town Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Section 498A, 306 read with Section 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard Sri Manjegowda, Advocate, on behalf of Sri K.A.Chandrashekara, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 in C.C.No.2637/2019 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala for the offences punishable under Section 498A and 306 read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. The entire charge sheet papers discloses that there is no dispute with regard to the marriage between the accused No.1/petitioner herein and the deceased Vinutha R.G., which took place on 07.11.2016. Thereafter, they lived happily for some time. It is alleged that the deceased Vinutha has developed some intimacy with another person and in this context there was some telephonic conversation between her and said third person which came to the knowledge of the accused No.1 and other accused persons. The differences arose between the husband and wife was resolved by virtue of the compromise as the deceased gave her undertaking that she would not continue the said conversation with any other person over phone. But inspite of it, it is alleged that the accused are unhappy with her conduct, they were ill-treating and harassing her. During the course of investigation the police have also recorded the statement of the mother of the victim which discloses that on the previous day of the incident, there was some pooja in the house of the sister of deceased by name Chaitra and said lady has invited all the members of the family of the accused to the said pooja. But the deceased did not go there. However the father-in-law of the deceased by name Siddappa went to the pooja. On the next day Chaitra enquired as to why deceased did not come to the said function, then she disclosed that her husband directed her and her mother-in-law not to go to said pooja.
4. Abruptly, on the next day the information was received by the mother of the victim to the effect that the said deceased/victim has committed suicide in her matrimonial home and when there was nobody inside the house. It is alleged that only due to ill-treatment and harassment by the accused, she has committed suicide by hanging herself.
5. The above said factual aspects at this stage creates a doubt whether said lady has committed suicide only because of any ill-treatment and that too the ill- treatment was such an extent which was sufficient to drive a lady to commit suicide. The sensitivity of the said lady as to how she was responding with the other members of the family and how the members were responding to the conduct of the deceased. All these things play a dominant role in such cases, which has to be established during the course of full dressed trial.
6. Under the above said circumstances, as the petitioner has already been arrested and he has been in judicial custody and charge sheet has already been filed, on stringent conditions the petitioner can be enlarged on bail. Hence the following:
O R D E R The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner/accused No.1 shall be released on bail in Cr.No.112/2019 of Nelamangala Town Police Station, Bengaluru (C.C.No.2637/2019 pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Nelamangala) for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(One Lakh only) with one surety for the like- sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii. The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii. The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional court on all the future hearing dates unless exempted by the court for any genuine cause.
iv. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Kmv/-
Sd/- JUDGE
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

Santhosh Kumar vs Rashekara K A

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
26 November, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra