IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3718/2019 BETWEEN:
Sri. Yallappa S/o Venkatesh Aged about 28 years R/at No.401, Buldota 2nd Cross, 14th Main Munivenkatappa ‘A’ Layout Bengaluru – 560 061. …Petitioner (By Sri. B.G.Lokesha, Advocate) AND State by Subramanyapura Police Station Bengaluru. …Respondent (By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.423/2018 (C.C.No.6320/2019) of Subramanyapura Police Station, Benglauru for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
This Criminal Petition is coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to release him on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.423/2018 (C.C.No.6320/2019) of Subramanyapura Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B read with 34 of IPC and also under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that the deceased Ranjitha was married to accused No.1 on 21.04.2017 by giving dowry in the form of gold and cash. Thereafter accused Nos. 1 and 2 started ill-treating and harassing the deceased for demanding dowry. It is further alleged that deceased came and told CW-1 to 3, 11 and 12 about the ill-treatment and harassment and the matter was pacified. At that time accused Nos. 1 and 2 agreed that they will look after the deceased well. Subsequently the ill- treatment and harassment continued and on 29.12.2018 deceased committed suicide. On the basis of the complaint a case has been registered.
4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused that the petitioner is innocent, highly qualified and he is serving in a very good job. Already investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioner/accused is not required for further investigation or interrogation. It is his further submission that the deceased has not left any death note. If really, there was any ill-treatment and harassment was done, under such circumstances she could have left the death note. Earlier also no complaints have been registered as against the petitioner for having ill-treated and harassed the petitioner. The deceased was pressurizing the petitioner to have a separate accommodation and as the petitioner was having dependant father, a sister and others hence, he told the deceased that he is going to have a separate house only when his sister attains majority. It is his further submission that he is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petition and release the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that there is ample material against the petitioner/accused-1 for having involved in the alleged ill-treatment and harassment. The marriage of the petitioner and deceased was performed on 21.04.2017 and the deceased committed suicide by hanging on 29.12.2018 i.e., one and half years after the marriage of the petitioner and deceased. There is a presumption in law, if the death takes place within seven years from the date of marriage, it is a dowry death. This is his further submission that the accused/petitioner has not given any explanation as under what circumstances the death has taken place in the matrimonial home under Section 106 of Evidence Act. CW14 is the Security Guard and he deposed in his evidence about the quarrel between petitioner/accused No.1 and subsequently, deceased committed suicide. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the complaint, other material and charge sheet that there is ample material to show that the petitioner/accused No.1 along with accused No.2 has ill-treated and harassed the deceased for demand of dowry and even the records also goes to show that Panchayat was also held when the deceased was informed CW 1 to 3, 11 and 12. It is also noticed that CW14 –Security Guard spoken with regard to quarrel taken place between the deceased and accused -1.
8. Under such facts and circumstances, I feel that there is a prima-facie material against the accused No.1 having involved in the heinous offence. Accordingly, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
Hence, the petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE BVK/NR