Karnataka High Court
Fazil Ahammad vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 October, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:37706
CRL.P No. 10654 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10654 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. FAZIL AHAMMAD,
S/O. AKAL AHAMMAD,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT NO.322/1, 18TH CROSS,
MAHADEVAPURA MAIN ROAD,
SHANTHINAGAR, MYSURU - 570 019.
2. M. ASLAM PASHA,
S/O LATE MOHAMMAD PEER,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
R/AT NO.3044, 1ST STAGE,
3RD CROSS, NEAR MADE GOWDA CIRCLE,
RAJIVNAGAR, MYSURU - 570 007. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI ARSHAD M.P., ADVOCATE FOR SRI LETHIF B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by
MALA K N REPRESENTED BY WOMEN POLICE STATION,
Location: HIGH MYSURU DISTRICT,
COURT OF REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE - 01. ... RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.PC
PRAYING TO RELEASE THEM ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF ARREST IN
CR.NO.162/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498(A), 324, 355, 504,
506, 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT AND
SEC. 4 OF MUSLIM WOMEN (PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF MARRIAGE)
ACT, 2019 BY MYSURU CITY WOMEN POLICE STATION, MYSURU
DISTRICT AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC, MYSURU.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:37706
CRL.P No. 10654 of 2023
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In this petition, the petitioners seek grant of bail in Crime No.162/2023 of Mysuru City Women Police for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 324, 355, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC; Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.
2. Heard Sri.M.P.Arshad, learned counsel on behalf of Sri.B.Lethif, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt.N.Anitha Girish, HCGP for the respondent/State.
3. Brief facts of the case are, the marriage of complainant was performed with accused No.1 on 08.06.2015. After the marriage, complainant came to the house of accused No.1 and 2. Her marriage was cordial for 8 days only, thereafter they started harassing the complainant; in demand of additional dowry of Rs.5 lakhs. She was subjected to physical and mental torture and this was intensified at the ill-advice of accused Nos.3 and 4. -3-
NC: 2023:KHC:37706 CRL.P No. 10654 of 2023 Accused No.5, who is petitioner No.2 herein, tried to come in physical contact with the complainant, he physically tried to meddle with her by touching her in appropriately. When this was brought to the notice of her husband, he did not question it rather he ill-treated the complainant. Accused No.4 physically assaulted her and ill-advised the accused No.1 too harass her. Ultimately on 31.08.2023, the accused No.1 had brought the complainant to the house of accused No.2 and uttered 'Talaq' for five times and driven her out of the house. Without any other alternative, she files the complaint on 16.09.2023, resulting in the petitioners to go before the learned Sessions judge for grant of pre-arrest bail. The request of accused Nos.2 and 3 was considered and the request of accused Nos.1, 4 and 5 was rejected. Hence, accused Nos.4 and 5 are before this court.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced on both sides and perused the materials on record.
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:37706 CRL.P No. 10654 of 2023
5. There is no dispute as to the marriage and the matrimonial life led by the complainant with accused No.1. Accused No.2 is the mother of accused No.1. Accused Nos.3 to 5 are their relatives. The allegation is that accused Nos.3 to 5 have ill-advised accused No.1, which prompted accused Nos.1 and 2 to subject the complainant to harassment in demand of dowry of Rs.5 lakhs. According to the complainant, harassment started eight days after marriage i.e., 16.06.2015. Till 31.08.2023 she has tolerated the same and led the marital life for about eight years with her husband. Since the marriage is performed eight years ago, the provisions of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, are not applicable. The allegation against these petitioners are that, petitioner No.1 has ill- advised her husband whereas the demand of petitioner No.2 physical favour from the complainant was not yielded any response, so on 31.08.2023, they forced accused No.1 to give Talaq to her.
6. The material on record though directs several allegations against the accused persons, there is a delay of -5- NC: 2023:KHC:37706 CRL.P No. 10654 of 2023 15 days in filing the complaint. Though the complainant is residing in Mysuru itself, she goes to Police Station only on 16.09.2023 to report the alleged incident. There is no complaint against the accused persons about the harassment and ill-treatment that was meted out soon after the marriage. Now the matter has been under investigation and the presence of the petitioners is required for the reason of in the event of arrest, the petitioners may be subjected to judicial custody. The complainant and accused No.1 have led marital life for about 8 years. Whether there was valid Talaq or not, what is the nature of harassment and ill-treatment given has to come out during investigation. Since it is a sensitive matter between husband and wife, the court should facilitate the parties for re-union and broken hearts has to be brought together. Refusal of bail may deteriorate their relationship.
7. In the background and facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any reason to refuse exercise of discretion the petitioners have undertaken to abide by any -6- NC: 2023:KHC:37706 CRL.P No. 10654 of 2023 condition that would be imposed by this court. The apprehension of the prosecution could be suitably met out by imposing proper conditions. Hence, the petition deserves merit consideration. In the result, the following;
ORDER
(i) The Petition is allowed.
(ii) The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.162/2023 registered by the Mysuru City Women Police, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 324, 355, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC; Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, on execution of a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one like bond to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.
(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and assist for the investigation;
-7-
NC: 2023:KHC:37706 CRL.P No. 10654 of 2023
(iv) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigation and they shall appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for;
(v) The petitioners shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly.
SD/-
JUDGE KNM List No.: 3 Sl No.: 22 CT: BHK