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

Sri Srinivasa Reddy And Others vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|10 December, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO.8162/2019 BETWEEN 1. SRI. SRINIVASA REDDY S/O. MUTHURA KONDAIAH AGED 54 YEARS R/AT. NO.215, AVALAHALLI BIDARAHALLI HOBLI VIRGONAGAR BENGALURU – 560 049 2. SMT. M.RAVANAMMA W/O. SRINIVASA REDDY AGED 50 YEARS R/AT. NO.215, AVALAHALLI BIDARAHALLI HOBLI VIRGONAGAR BENGALURU – 560 049 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GADILINGAPPA G.M, ADVOCATE) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA BY H.A.L POLICE STATION BENGALURU CITY REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU – 560 001 … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ROHITH B.J, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN CR.NO.104/2019 OF H.A.L POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.498-A, 302, 201 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the Respondent –State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.
2 & 3 in Crime No. 104/2019 of respondent-HAL Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 302, 201 r/w. 34 of IPC, which is now pending on the file of XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Bengaluru City.
3. The brief facts of the case are that, Petitioner No.2 is the Sister-in-law of the deceased and sister of Accused No.1. Petitioner No.1 is the husband of Petitioner No.2. Both petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 (A2 & A3) were residing separately. Accused No.1-Srinivasa Reddy and deceased – Palukond Vengamma married each other on 11.6.2016 and thereafter, they started living together at Hemanthanagar within the jurisdiction of HAL Police Station. Accused No.1 alleged to have ill- treated and harassed the deceased on the ground that, she did not beget any child. In this context, it is alleged that on 09.03.2019 at 4.00 p.m. he administered four sleeping tablets in juice and thereafter, with the help of pillow, he smothered her mouth and nose and in order to make believe the world that she died due to electric shock, he made her to touch electric heater in the house and thereby, it is alleged that he committed the offence under Section 302 of IPC. It is also alleged that, after the death of the deceased, he transported the dead body to Andhra Pradesh with the help of accused Nos.2 and 3 and hence, the police have invoked the provision under Section 201 of IPC apart from invoking Section 498-A of IPC.
3. On careful perusal of the entire materials on record, there is no dispute that the husband and wife were residing together on the date of the incident. The death occurred in the house of the accused. The allegations against the petitioners (A2 & A3) are that, they have assisted Accused No.1 to transport the dead body of the deceased.
4. It is submitted that, Accused No.1 has already been released on bail by this Court in Criminal Petition No.5862/2019 vide order dated 07.11.2019. Therefore, these petitioners are also entitled to be enlarged on bail, on the ground of parity on certain conditions. Hence, the following:-
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners (A2 and A3) shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.104/2019 of HAL Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 498- A, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC, which is now pending on the file of XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall execute their personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioners shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against them is disposed of.
KGR* 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 Srinivasa Reddy And Others vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
10 December, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra