IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.2372/2019 Between:
T. Vishnuvardhana Reddy, Aged about 36 years, S/o T. Venkatarama Reddy, R/at G-3, Faida Farms Apartment, Belatturu Village, Kadugodi, Bengaluru – 560 067. … Petitioner (By Sri M.T. Nanaiah, Senior Counsel for Sri MRC Manohar, Advocate) And:
The State of Karnataka by, Kadugodi Police Station, Bengaluru, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Complex, Bangalore – 560 001. … Respondent (By Sri S. Rachaiah, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.292/2018 of Kadugodi Police Station, Bangalore City for the offences p/u/s 304B and 498A of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER Petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.292/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 304B, 498A of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the informant who is the father of the deceased had lodged a complaint stating that he had celebrated the marriage of the deceased along with the petitioner on 26.02.2012. It is stated that at the time of marriage, an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- with 450 Gms. of gold was given as dowry. It is alleged that the petitioner was misbehaving with the daughter of the informant and there were allegedly demands for additional dowry. It is stated that on 15.09.2018, petitioner and his wife had come to the house of the informant and the petitioner is stated to have demanded a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- towards additional dowry. It comes out that on 01.10.2018 information was given to the informant that his daughter had died. On the basis of the alleged incident, complaint was filed, FIR is registered, investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. It is stated that the petitioner has been in custody since 09.03.2019 till date.
3. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the version of the mother and the sister of the deceased when their statements were recorded during the inquest proceedings by the Tahsildar are at variance with the version of the informant in the present complaint. It is stated that before the Tahsildar no allegations of harassment as regards dowry has been made out, whereas in the present complaint by the informant filed on 03.11.2018 allegations of harassment in connection with the demands for dowry had been made out. It is pointed out that proof of offence is a matter for trial and the present proceedings cannot be treated to be punitive in nature.
4. Taking note of the fact that the investigation is complete and charge sheet is filed, question as to whether the acts of harassment by the petitioner had led the deceased to commit suicide is a matter to be proved during trial. Taking note of the fact that the investigation is complete and that the petitioner is an employee of John F Welch Technology Centre and noting that the present proceedings cannot be considered to be proceedings for punishment, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
5. Accordingly, 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.292/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 304B, 498A of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(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.
Sd/- JUDGE VP