Karnataka High Court
Adappa S/O. Karibasappa Malagatti vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 December, 2017
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K. Somashekar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102561/2017
BETWEEN
Adappa
S/o: Karibasappa Malagatti,
Age: 28 Years, Occ: Agriculture,
R/o; Adavibhavi, Tq: Kushtagi,
Dist: Koppal.
.......Petitioner
(By Sri S.S.Yadrami, Advocate )
AND:
The State of Karnataka
By Tavargera Police
Rep. By the State Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench.
........Respondent
(By Sri Praveen.K Uppar, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C., seeking to allow the petition and order to release the
petitioner on bail in C.C.No.465/2017 (Tavaragera P.S.
Cr.No.30/2017) for the alleged offences under Section 498-A,
304-B r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition
Act, 1969, pending on the file of JMFC Kushtagi.
2
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the court
made the following:
ORDER
This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Tavaregera P.S. in Crime No.30/2017 for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, besides Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Since from the date of his arrest, the petitioner is in judicial custody. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner is praying for enlargement of the petitioner on regular bail.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the complainant who has filed a complaint before the respondent police alleging that his sister Doddabasamma had been given in marriage about 2 years back to Adappa of Adavibhavi Village in Kushtagi Taluka and alleged that at the time of marriage a sum of Rs.41,000/- and 4 tolas of gold had been given in terms of dowry along with other household articles. It is also alleged that after the marriage, 3 his sister Doddabasamma was residing with her husband's house along with in-laws and the brother of the husband. However, after the marriage, for one year, the deceased Doddabasamma was looked after very well and thereafter, the husband, in-laws and husband's brother of the deceased Doddabasamma have started to give physical and mental harassment to her stating that she has not brought sufficient dowry and due to which she committed suicide by dousing kerosene over her person in the intervening night of 06.04.2017 and 07.04.2017 between 09:00 p.m. to 06:30 a.m. Accordingly, on filing of the complaint by the complainant, a case came to be registered for the aforesaid alleged offences and the FIR was recorded by the Police and thereafter proceeded with the investigation.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent - State.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments contended that the marriage of deceased was performed with this accused for about two 4 years back. Subsequently, she led the happy marital life with the accused. However, the deceased had committed suicide by dousing kerosene over her person and this accused has been roped into the alleged crime that the accused had given physical and mental harassment to the deceased and caused her death. It is further contended that the accused who was doing some work in Bengaluru, but on the fateful day that he had not been taken her to Bengaluru and for that reason she was under depression and due to that depression, she has committed suicide on the intervene night of 06.04.2017 and 07.04.2017 in between 9.00 p.m and 6.30 a.m. But there is no specific overt act attributed against this accused that he had given physical and mental harassment to the deceased and abetted her to committing the suicide. It is further contended that subsequent to registration of the crime against the accused, the Investigating Officer who has taken up the case for investigation and during the investigation he has recorded the statement of CWs.1 to 21 5 and conducted the mahazar in presence of pancha witness. CWs.14 and 15 are the witnesses have been secured by the Investigating Officer to conduct inquest held over the dead body. After completion of the entire investigation done by the Investigating Officer has laid the charge sheet against the accused before the concerned Court of law. It is further contended that the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court by imposing suitable conditions as specified therein. But the allegation made against this accused that he had given physical and mental harassment that she is not fair complexion and also insisting to bring the additional dowry from her parents house and the same has been created to register the case. It is further contended that the petitioner is an innocent person and hails from the respectable family and having respect in the eye of society. despite of it, the crime came to be registered by the respondent - Police against the petitioner just to give harassment to him and there is no direct overt act attributed against the petitioner for the alleged 6 offences. However, the petitioner is in judicial custody since form the date of arrest. It is further contended that the petitioner is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail to him. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent - State contended that on the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant, a case came to be registered in Crime No.30/2017 for the aforesaid alleged offences, alleging that the deceased committed suicide by dousing kerosene in the intervening night of 06.04.2017 and 07.04.2017 between 09:00 p.m. to 06:30 a.m., as the same has been reflected in the complaint filed by the complainant and the FIR recorded by the Police, alleging that the accused had given physical and mental harassment on the ground that the deceased had not brought enough dowry despite of Rs.41,000/- and 4 tolas of gold had been given as dowry along with other household articles at the 7 time of her marriage and the same has been reflected in the charge sheet which is laid by the Investigating Officer. It is further contended that the accused being the husband of deceased and he has also given physical and mental harassment to the deceased and abetted the deceased by committing suicide by dousing kerosene over her person. Therefore, it appears that there are prima facie materials against the accused and accordingly, the learned HCGP prays to reject the bail petition, as the petitioner does not deserve for the bail as sought for.
6. Keeping in view the contention of learned counsel for petitioner and the contention taken by the learned HCGP for the respondent - State relating to the case in crime No.30/2017 which is registered by the Tavaragera Police, but subsequent to registration of the crime against the accused the case is taken up for investigation by the Investigating Officer and laid the charge sheet against the accused In C.C.No.465/2017. However, the marriage of the deceased which is performed 8 with this accused for about two years back and at the time of her marriage her parents provided a sum of Rs.41,000/- and 4 tolas of gold in terms of dowry along with other household articles. Subsequent to her marriage she had been to her husband's house to lead the marital life as his family consisting of her in-laws as well as brother of this accused and this accused had been proceeded to Bengaluru for doing some work, but on the fateful day that he had not been taken her to Bengaluru and for that reason she was under depression and due to that depression, she has committed suicide by dousing kerosene over her person and set her ablaze as this contention has been taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner apart from other grounds urged. As the co-accused have already been granted bail by imposing suitable conditions as specified therein. But this accused being the husband of deceased and he also given physical and mental harassment and the said averments made in the complaint as well as the materials collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of 9 investigation, wherein the charge sheet has been laid. Whereas, during her marriage, her parents had provided dowry in terms of cash in a sum of Rs.41,000/- and gold ornaments but there is no written documents to show that during her marriage they provided dowry. Whereas the learned HCGP during the course of arguments has contended that vehicle belongs to the brother of deceased, the same has provided to this accused, wherein this accused had been used vehicle and he has fell down and sustained injuries and for that reason also there was altercation took between the deceased and accused. Keeping in view the materials which were collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, wherein he has laid the charge sheet against the accused, it is consisting of statement of CWs.1 to 21 which is recorded including mahazar which is conducted by Investigating Officer. CWs.14 and 15 are the witnesses have been secured by the Investigating Officer to conduct inquest held over the dead body of the deceased including spot mahazar 10 in their presence. It is alleged in the complaint as well as the materials which were secured by the Investigating Officer which reveals that on 30.03.2017, the accused alleged to be picked up quarrel with the deceased, that neither the cash nor the motorcycle has been provided from her parents and for that reason there was altercation took between the deceased and accused, but this accused who is said to be the husband of deceased had been to Bengaluru to eke out the life for fetching work and that he has not taken her to Bengaluru and for that reason only she was under depression.
7. Hence, it is necessary to state that at this stage though enough materials have been collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of Investigation for the alleged offences against the accused and the same is enough for proceeding with the case for framing of charge against him. But it cannot be said that there are enough materials to decline the relief of bail.
11
8. Therefore, keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, it is said that it does not require for any detailed discussion, while considering the bail petition filed by the petitioner, as there are substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking for the relief of bail.
9. Whereas, the learned HCGP submits that if the petitioner is supposed to be released on bail, certainly he would come in the way of prosecution case and would destroy the evidence. As this apprehension expressed by the learned HCGP, could be curtailed by imposing certain suitable conditions to safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons as well as under the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is deserving for bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
12
ORDER The bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby allowed, subject to the following conditions:
(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with like sum surety to the satisfaction of the concerned Court of law, as where the case in Crime No.30/2017 is pending.
(2) The petitioner shall not tamper or hamper the case of prosecution witnesses.
(3) The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court on all the dates of hearing without fail.
(4) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a month i.e. on first week of Sunday in between 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. before the concerned SHO, pending disposal of the entire case.
(5) The petitioner shall not indulge with any other criminal activities henceforth.13
If the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the bail order shall automatically stands ceased.
SD/-
JUDGE msr