Karnataka High Court
Basavraj S/O. Babu Karade vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 July, 2014
Author: K.N.Phaneendra
Bench: K.N. Phaneendra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2014
BEFORE
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101055/2014
BETWEEN:
1. BASAVRAJ
S/O. BABU KARADE
AGE: 28 YEARS,
OCC: PRIVATE WORK
R/O. AKKOL
TQ: CHIKKODI
DSTI: BELGAUM
2. BABU S/O. APPA KARADE
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC:NIL
R/O. AKKOL TQ: CHIKKODI
DIST: BELGAUM
3. SMT. MAHADEVI
W/O. BABU KARADE
AGE: 55 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O. AKKOL
TQ: CHIKKODI
DIST: BELGAUM
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI : SHRIKANT T PATIL, ADVOCATE)
2
AND :
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY NIPPANI RURAL PSI BELGAUM
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, HIGH COURT
GOVERNMENT PLEADER)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF
CR.P.C. SEEKING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL IN RESPECT
OF NIPPANI RURAL P.S. CRIME NO.29/2014 SECTIONS
498A & 306 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State. Perused the records.
2. A person by name Satagouda Kalagouda Patil of Hunnaragi village has lodged a complaint stating that his daughter by name Pooja was given in marriage to petitioner No.1 about five years ago and after the marriage they lived 3 happily with each other and they were blessed with a male child. It is alleged that complainant had another daughter by name Gayathri and petitioners demanded the complainant to give said Gayathri in marriage to Raju, who is the brother of petitioner No.1. Complainant and his family members were exhausted to the request of petitioners. Therefore, as per the complainant, it appears that there was mis-understanding between the two families, which has led to the ill-treatment and harassment of deceased Pooja by the petitioners. Gayathri was given in marriage to another person of Madagoan village, Maharashtra State. In fact, the said marriage had enraged petitioners to continue the ill- treatment and harassment to deceased Pooja. The same has led deceased Pooja to commit suicide by jumping into the well, situated near her house on 10.05.2014. On these allegations, police have started the investigation and arrested the petitioners on 11.05.2014 and since then they are in judicial custody. The allegations made against petitioners are not with reference to any demand of dowry or 4 for any other reason. At this stage, it is very difficult to draw an inference that even after marriage of Gayathri, petitioners have continued their demand and have also ill-treated and harassed the deceased Pooja for the same reason. Hence, the said fact has to be established before the Court, during the course of full dressed trial. Even otherwise, according to him, it is not a strong reason to come to any conclusion that the ill-treatment and harassment even if it is assumed, at this stage, are sufficient to drive a woman to commit suicide. Under the above said facts and circumstances, the accused persons are the residents of Akkol village, Chikkodi taluk. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are aged about 65 and 55 years and petitioner No.1 is aged about 28 years. Hence, petitioners are ready and willing to offer substantial surety and abide by conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Therefore, it is a fit case to grant bail, particularly under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the following -
5
ORDER Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. Consequently, the petitioners shall be released on bail in connection with P.S. Crime No.29/2014 of Nippani Rural Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34 of I.P.C., subject to the following conditions:
i) Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for a likesum to the satisfaction of jurisdictional Magistrate.
ii) Petitioners shall not indulge themselves in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) Petitioner No.1 shall mark his attendance once in 15 days on every Sunday between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. before the Investigating Officer, till the 6 completion of investigation or for a period of two months, whichever is earlier.
iv) Petitioners shall attend the Court on every date of hearing without fail, unless prevented by any genuine cause.
v) Petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of trial Court without prior permission, till the case registered against them is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE hnm/