IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5862/2019 BETWEEN:
SRI.SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O RAGHAVULU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NO.114, ‘SRINILAYAM, 4TH CROSS, HEMANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 049.
(BY SRI. GADILINGAPPA G.M., ADV.,) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY H.A.L. POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY. REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE – 01.
(BY SRI. ROHITH B.J., HCGP) ... PETITIONER …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER 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 SECTION 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent – state. Perused the records.
2. On three occasions that was on 10.10.2019, 21.10.2019 and 31.10.2019, this Court had granted time to learned HCGP to secure the final post mortem report from the Doctor of this case. Even as on today, the said document is not produced before this Court. In view of the above, on the basis of the materials available on record, the Court proceeded to pass the following order.
3. The brief facts of the case are that:
The petitioner and deceased – Palukond Vengamma married each other on 11.6.2016.
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 begot any child. In this context, it is alleged that on 09.03.2019 at 4.00 p.m. he administered juice putting four sleeping tablets and thereafter, with the help of pillow, he smothered her mouth and nose and in order to show the whole 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.
4. 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 post mortem report and other materials shows that the accused himself has taken the deceased to the hospital and there, she was declared dead. The post mortem examination report shows that the opinion is reserved pending for chemical analysis. However, the post mortem report also shows that it is doubtful whether the incident happened due to smothering or due to electric shock. As noted above, inspite of granting sufficient time, the opinion of the Doctor has not been secured.
5. Under the above said facts and circumstances of the case, the prosecution has to prove the same during the course of full fledged trial that the death was due to smothering in order to attract Section 302 of IPC. Sections 498-A and 201 of IPC are seriously not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. When the death itself is doubtful whether it is homicidal or suicidal or in what manner the death occurred, in my opinion, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail as he has been in judicial custody since the date of the incident and he is no more required for further investigation. Hence, the following:-
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner 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, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE VMB