IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.2615/2019 BETWEEN:
Sri Dimpal K.A S/o. Sri.Aiyappa K.B, Aged about 28 years, R/of Bengoor Village, Cherambane Post, Madikeri Taluk, Kodagu District-571 201.
(By Sri C.R.Gopala Swamy, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka By Bhagamandala Police Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001 2. Smt. M.D.Mouna D/o. Sri M.S.Dara, W/o. Sri K.A. Dimpal, R/at Makkanduru Village & Post, Madikeri Taluk, Kodagu District – 571 201.
(By Sri K.P.Yoganna, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondents This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of this arrest in Crime No.84/2018 of Bhagamandala Police Station Kodagu for the offences punishable under Sections 341,323, 504, 506(2) 498A read with Section 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner has filed the petition seeking to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest with respect to the proceedings in Crime No.84/2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506(2) and 498A read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that respondent No.2 has filed PCR No.5/2018. It is stated that the petitioner and respondent No.2 were married on 17.05.2018. It is further alleged that the petitioner was not doing his work properly and he used to consume alcohol and quarrel with respondent No.2, who is the complainant. It is further alleged that the complainant’s father had purchased many items of daily use for the family. It is further alleged that the petitioner has pledged complainant’s gold chain in the bank and other allegations have also been made against the petitioner. In the light of difference of opinion between the complainant and the petitioner, they had approached the District Legal Services Authority and counseling is stated to have been done. It is further stated that on 19.11.2018, they had appeared before the same Authority and the petitioner was directed to hand over the belongings to the complainant. It is only subsequently that PCR was filed and the matter was referred to the Police authority for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and the FIR came to be lodged.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that respondent No.2 was married to the petitioner on 17.05.2018 and due to difference of opinion amongst the spouses they approached the District Legal Services Authority. It is further alleged that the complaint is malafide and has been filed in the light of the difference in opinion. It is further stated that the petitioner would cooperate with the investigation, and no case is made out for custodial interrogation.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader however, opposes grant of anticipatory bail and states that custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required.
5. Taking note of the fact that the differences of opinion have cropped up with their relationship within four months of their marriage and also that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation, taking note of the contents of PCR, there is force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that custodial interrogation as such may not be required. It is noticed that Sessions Court has rejected the application of the petitioner, while enlarging the other accused on anticipatory bail.
6. In light of the observations made above and looking into the nature of offences alleged, the case is made out for enlarging the petitioner on anticipatory bail in Crime No.84/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506(2) and 498A read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear in person before the Investigating Officer in connection with Crime No.84/2018 within 15 days from the date of release of the order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way, any witness.
(iii) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his attendance before the concerned Station House Officer once in week between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the final report.
(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 GJM