IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9423/2018 Between:
Sri.Govindaraju S/o late Kempanna Aged about 46 years Residing at Shivaganga Layout, Venugopala Nagar, Nagasandra Post, Doddabidarakallu, Bengaluru – 560 079. ... Petitioner (By Sri P.M.Siddamallappa, Advocate) And:
State of Karnataka Represented by Halasuru Gate Women’s Police Station, Bengaluru City, Pin Code – 560 009. By its SPP High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri. M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.27/2017 (C.C.No.2533/2008) of Halasur Gate Women Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of D.P Act.
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 No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking release him on bail in Crime No.27/2007 of Halasuru Gate Women’s Police Station (C.C.No.2533/2008 on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru) for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. On the basis of the complaint given by one Smt.Gangamma, wife of petitioner/accused No.1, the case has been registered. In the complaint, it is alleged that the accused persons after the marriage on 05.12.2000, started ill-treating and harassing the complainant. As she was carrying, she came to her parents house. She gave birth to a male child. After five months, she had gone to her matrimonial home, at that time also, the petitioner/accused repeated their harassment and ill-treatment and they have also assaulted the complainant and as such, case was registered in the above said crime. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier, the petitioner/accused No.1 was released on regular bail by the trial Court and when the matter was posted for trial, some conciliation proceedings took place. The petitioner/accused No.1 is working as a Conductor. Because of unavoidable circumstances, he did not attend the Court. Even when he sent messages for the learned counsel to appear on behalf of him, there was a communication gap, as such, his absence was noted and trial Court issued NBW and on execution of NBW, he has been taken to custody. He further submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 is ready and willing to proceed with trial. If the petitioner/accused No.1 is kept in custody, his valuable rights are to be effected and it amounts to punishment before the trial. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and also ready to offer surety. He is ready to attend regularly before the trial Court till the trial is concluded. On these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the complaint was registered in the year 2007 and thereafter, the petitioner/accused No.1 has been released on bail and more than 10 years, he has not appeared before the Court and continuously remained absent. The Court below without there being any alternative has issued NBW and taken him to custody. Otherwise, the trial will not be concluded. He further submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 is in the habit of avoiding the trial and he will not be present before the Court as and when he is called. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.
5. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
6. As could be seen from the records, the alleged offence has taken place on 11.10.2007 and a case has been registered in this behalf and thereafter, charge sheet has also been filed. This is the oldest case on the file of the said Court and even records also go to show that the petitioner/accused No.1 has continuously remained absent and the Court has also taken various steps to serve notice and thereafter, it has issued the warrant and warrant has been executed and he has been taken to custody it shows that there are lapses on the part of the petitioner/accused No.1 in attending the Court. When he has been released on bail, the duty is cast upon the petitioner/accused No.1 to attend the Court regularly and he should not hurdle the trial and inconvenience to the Court. Be that as it may, the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Already, the petitioner/accused No.1 is in custody for more than 5 months and he is undertaking that he will regularly attend the Court. He will not jump the bail. Under the said facts and circumstances, I feel that custodial interrogation of the petitioner/accused No.1 is not necessary till the trial is concluded. If one more opportunity is given, no prejudice is going to cause to the complainant as well as to the prosecution. It will help the Court to proceed with trial.
7. In that light, petition is allowed Petitioner/accused No.1 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.27/2007 (C.C.No.2533/2008) of Halasuru Gate Women’s Police Station, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC and under Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act subject to the following conditions:-
1. Petitioner/accused No.1 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 be regular in attending the trial till the trial is concluded.
3. He shall not tamper the prosecution evidence in any manner directly or indirectly and shall not indulge in similar type of criminal activities.
4. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
5. He shall mark his attendance once in a month between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police.
6. If he remains absent during the course of trial, the trial Court is at liberty to cancel the bail and take him to custody till trial is concluded.
SD/- JUDGE NBM