IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4089/2019 BETWEEN SMT. SUVARNA LAKHSMI S/O SUBBARAYADU, W/O SATHYANARAYANA M.C.K. AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT BESIDES BOYS HIGH SCHOOL, PEAPULLY POST, KURNOOL, AP – 518221.
...PETITIONER (BY SRI MOHAN KUMAR D, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA WILSON GARDEN POLICE STATION, WILSON GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 001 REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SMT. HEMAVATHI, W/O MR. HARI KIRAN, PRESENTLY AT NO.53, NIRMALA BUILDING, 1ST MAIN, NEAR AYYAPPA TEMPLE, SUDHAMANAGAR, BANGALORE – 560027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI HONNAPPA, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO GRANT BAIL IN CR.NO.136/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE WILSON GARDEN POLICE TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL, UNDER SECTION 3(1) (r), 3(1) (s) of SC & ST PREVENTION 3(10), 3(xi) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989 AND U/S.
498(A) AND UNDER SEC.3 AND 4 OF DP ACT, 1961.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Notice issued to the complainant-second respondent is served as per the submission of the learned HCGP and the complainant has remained absent. There is no representation.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.
3. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.3 in Crime No.136/2017 of Wilson garden Police Station, Bengaluru City, filed by the complainant- respondent No.2 before the Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bangalore, referred to the respondent-Police for investigation and report.
4. The main allegations made in the complaint as well as could be seen from the charge sheet are that the complainant belonged to Scheduled Caste i.e., Adi Karnataka by caste, accused Nos.1, 2 &v 3 belonged to Vyshya community. Accused No.1 and the complainant married each other which was a love marriage knowing fully well about their castes and accused Nos.2 to 4 have also agreed for the said marriage. It is alleged that at the time of marriage some gold, silver and other household articles were given in consideration of the marriage and the marriage was performed on 16.05.2012. It is alleged that after the marriage, the accused persons demanded dowry of Rs.50,000/-. In the meantime, on 18.03.2013 the complainant gave birth to a girl child. The accused persons did not even go to see the said child and did not attend the naming ceremony of the said child. After confinement, the complainant went to Chennai and accused No.1 and the complainant stayed there for sometime. It is alleged that accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 often visited the said house and demanded for dowry, abusing the complainant in filthy language and referring to her caste and being frustrated, the complainant also made attempts to commit suicide by consuming sleeping tablets. In this context, it is alleged that the accused persons have committed the above said offences.
5. During the course of investigation, the police have recorded the statements of the complainant and other witnesses CW-5, 6 and 7. On careful perusal of the statements of all the witnesses, though they have made an omnibus statement that these petitioners were also abusing the complainant in filthy language and demanding the dowry etc., they have not stated at what time, place and date actually those abusive words were used. Admittedly CWs.5, 6 and 7 are not the public, but they are the relatives belonging to the said caste of the complainant. Therefore, during the course of evidence, it is thrashed out whether any offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act is attracted. The other offences alleged are not so seriously punishable. Under the above said facts and circumstances, the main allegations are made against accused No.1, who is the husband of the victim lady. Accused Nos.3 and 4 are none other than the close relatives of accused No.1. Therefore, their names have also been incorporated in the complaint. The allegations made against them have to be strictly beyond reasonable doubt established during the course of full dressed trial. Under the above facts and circumstances, I do not find any reasons to reject the bail petition. Hence the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.136/2017 of Wilson Garden Police Station, Bengaluru, [(S.C.No.1359/2018 on the file of City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, (CCH- 71)], subject to the following conditions:-
i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned jurisdictional Court.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for genuine reasons.
iv) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission, till the charge sheet is filed.
Sd/- JUDGE JT/-