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

Sri Ravi Kumar @ Ravindra Gowda vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|30 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4854/2019 BETWEEN:
Sri Ravi kumar @ Ravindra Gowda S/o. Papanna, Aged about 35 years, Residing at: 6th cross, Areleri road, Adarsha Nagar Malur town-563130 The petitioner is currently in judicial custody as an under trial prisoner at the District Prison, at Kolar.
(Ms. Melanie Sebastian, Adv.) AND:
State of Karnataka, By Malur Police Station, Malur, Kolar District, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru-560001.
(By Sri Rachchayya, H.C.G.P.) . Petitioner . Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the advocate for the petitioner praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.53/2019 of Malur Police Station, Kolar for the offence P/U/S. 302 and 304(B) r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders, through Video Conference, This day the Court, made the following:
ORDER The petitioner who is the husband of the deceased has filed the petition and seeks to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to proceedings in Crime No.53/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 304(B) read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. At the outset, it is to be noted that the other accused who are father and mother of the petitioner herein have enlarged on anticipatory bail and the petitions came to be allowed in Crl.P.Nos.2733/2019 and 2734/2019 as per the order dated 4th June, 2019.
3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a practicing Advocate and the question of fleeing from trial would not arise. It is also submitted that proof of the offence is a matter of trial and that the present proceedings cannot be construed to be punitive in nature. It is also submitted that the deceased had locked herself in the room and hence, the question of the petitioner or the other co-accused having committed the offence as alleged does not arise.
4. It is to be noted that the proof of the offence as alleged are matters for trial. It is also to be noted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 29.06.2019. It is further noted that interrogation of the petitioner is complete. It is also to be taken note that the petitioner is a practicing Advocate. Case is made out for enlarging the petitioner on bail by imposing appropriate conditions.
5. The learned H.C.G.P. submits that the FSL report has been received and upon instruction states that the report would point out that the death was due to hanging.
6. In light of the above facts, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to appropriate conditions.
7. 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.53/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 304(B) read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear in person before the Investigating Officer in connection with Crime No.53/2019, 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 before the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer and shall not indulge in any criminal activities of like nature.
(iv) The petitioner to mark his presence before the Station House Officer every alternate Sunday between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. till filing of charge sheet.
(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.
Naa 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

Sri Ravi Kumar @ Ravindra Gowda vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
30 August, 2019
Judges
  • S Sunil Dutt Yadav