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

Smt Shilpa vs Rashekara

High Court Of Karnataka|16 May, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3274 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SMT. SHILPA, W/O. BOREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/A. GANGANARASAIAH EXTENSION, THIPPENAHALLI, DODDABIDARAKALLU WARD, BENGALURU-560 078. ... PETITIONER [BY SRI. K.A.CHANDRASHEKARA, ADVOCATE] AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE POLICE OF HANUMANTHANAGARA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560 050, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT [BY SRI. NASRULLA KHAN, HCGP] * * * THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HER ARREST IN CR.NO.4/2019 (C.C. NO.6054/2019) OF HANUMANTHANAGAR P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 326(A) R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.4/2019 of Hanumanthanagar Police Station, Bengalury City, registered for the offences punishable under Section 326-A of IPC pending on the file of the XXIV Addl. CMM., Bengaluru. After investigation, charge- sheet has been filed against accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 326-A r/w. 34 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent/State.
3. On the complaint lodged by one Sri. Shashi Kumar R., the aforesaid case was registered against accused No.1-Roopa. It is alleged in the complaint that on 05.01.2019, at about 03.56 p.m., when the complainant was in his shop, he received a phone call from his friend one Shuba Gowda i.e., victim in this case, informing him that when she was sleeping in the house, her friend poured acid on her face and caused burning injuries. The complainant immediately went to Meenakshi Hospital and came to know that accused No.1 by name Roopa had poured acid on the victim Shuba Gowda.
4. During the course of investigation, the statement of the victim was recorded on 07.01.2019, wherein she has stated that accused No.1-Roopa poured some liquid from a water bottle on her which caused burning sensation and she came to know that the said liquid was acid. She has further stated that accused No.1 informed her that she has poured acid at the instance of one Bore Gowda, who is arrayed as accused No.2. On the same day, another statement of the victim was recorded by the Taluk Executive Magistrate, wherein also it is stated by the victim that accused No.1 poured acid on her at the instigation of Bore Gowda i.e., accused No.2.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge sheet has been filed implicating the petitioner as accused No.3 without any material. He submits that the petitioner is a lady and she is ready and willing to abide by reasonable condition/s that may be imposed by this Court.
Per contra, learned HCGP opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner contending that the charge-sheet has been filed against three persons and the petitioner is accused No.3. She has also instigated accused No.1 along with accused No.2 to commit the offence. Accordingly, he seeks to dismiss the petition.
6. The perusal of the FIR goes to show that the name of the petitioner does not find therein. Even in the subsequent statement of the deceased the name of the petitioner is not forthcoming. The allegations against the petitioner is that even she instigated accused No.1 along with accused No.2 to commit the offence. It is submitted that the victim has been discharged from the hospital on 14.01.2019. Considering the overt-act alleged against the petitioner and the fact that the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail in the event of her arrest in Crime No.4/2019 of Hanumanthanagar Police Station [C.C. No.6054/2019 on the file of XXIV Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru] for the offence punishable under Section 326-A r/w. 34 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the case within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees One Lakh Only] with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(ii) The petitioner shall co-operate with further investigation if any.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witness/es in any manner.
(iv) The petitioner shall be regular in attending the Court proceedings on all dates of hearing.
Sd/- JUDGE Ksm*
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

Smt Shilpa vs Rashekara

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
16 May, 2019
Judges
  • Mohammad Nawaz