Karnataka High Court
Kumari Daneshwari D/O Mahadev Maigur vs State Of Karnataka on 9 December, 2022
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103789 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. KUMARI DANESHWARI
D/O MAHADEV MAIGUR
AGE. 23 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O.HIREPADASALAGI,TQ. JAMKHANDI
DIST. BAGALKOT-587301
2. KUMARI BHUVANESHWARI
D/O MAHADEV MAIGUR
AGE. 21 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O.HIREPADASALAGI
TQ. JAMKHANDI,DIST. BAGALKOT-587301
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. GIRISH A YADAWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
DHARWAD
THROUGH PSI,
SAVALAGI POLICE STATION
DIST. BAGALKOT-587301
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V. MOGALI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO DIRECT THE SAVALAGI POLICE TO RELEASE THE
PETITIONERS (ACCUSED NOS. 3 AND 4 ON BAIL IN THE EVENT
-2-
CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022
OF THEIR ARREST IN CC NO. 38/2022 REGISTERED FOR THE FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323, 354(B), 427,
435, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, 1860, ON THE FILE OF
THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAMKHANDI.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 in split up charge sheet/accused Nos.3 and 4 in the original charge sheet under Section 438 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) seeking anticipatory bail in CC No.38/2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354B, 427, 435, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC', for brevity).
2. The case of the prosecution is that, one Smt. Sharada Kashappa Maigur has filed the complaint stating that, she is residing along with her family members in their land at Hirepadasalagi village and there is a common well and the same -3- CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022 was being used for watering the lands between the brothers' family. Since accused No.1 picked up quarrel, all the parties had stopped using the well and the complainant's family dug a bore well and used water from the same. Accused No.1 with the help of the village elders had started cultivating his lands using the water from the well on the ground that he is facing problems. In spite of the same, the accused persons continued picking up quarrel with the family members of the complainant and had even filed a case but still the complainant's family had been quiet. On 26.08.2020 at about 2:00pm when the husband of the complainant told accused Nos.1 and 2 that as per tradition Ganesh idol will be immersed in well, accused Nos.1 and 2 abused him in filthy language and threatened the complainant's family with life if they supported such immersion by the public. At that time, all the accused picked up quarrel with the complainant's family and accused No.1 caught hold of the saree of the complainant -4- CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022 and dragged it and hit her with hand by pushing her to the ground. At that time, the husband of the complainant interfered and he was also made to fall down and was beaten. Thereafter, the accused stating that they will burn the land and house, set fire to the sugarcane crop. When the complainant started shouting, adjacent land owners came and doused the fire. It is stated that the complainant's family suffered loss of Rs.75,000/- and brother-in- law of the complainant suffered loss of Rs.25,000/-. When the complainant enquired with the accused regarding the same, they told that they have burnt only the crop and next time, they will burn their house and kill them in the same. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.70/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354B 435, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. The Police after investigation filed charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences under Sections 323, 354B 435 427, 506 and 506 read with Section -5- CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022 34 of IPC and a case was registered in CC No.67/2021. Since accused Nos.2 to 4 did not appear, proclamation was issued against them by order dated 02.07.2022. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate by order date 02.08.2022, directed for filing of split up charge sheet against accused Nos.2 to 4. Thereafter, accused No.2 was produced before the Court in CC No.67/2021 and hence split up charge sheet was filed against the petitioners and the learned Magistrate issued NBW against the petitioners and a case is registered in CC No.38/2022. These petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 in split up charge sheet. These petitioners apprehending their arrest filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.5179/2022 seeking anticipatory bail and the same came to be rejected by the Sessions Court by order dated 15.10.2022. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail.
-6-CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent- State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that on perusal of the charge sheet material, there is no allegation of outraging the modesty of the complainant by these petitioners. It is his further submission that, the offences alleged against these petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioners are not proclaimed offenders and therefore, they can be considered for grant of anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. The petitioners have undertaken to appear before the jurisdictional Court on every date of hearing and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case. It is his further submission that, the petitioners are women and they are pursuing their studies and they are preparing for competitive examinations to secure job. If they are -7- CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022 arrested, it will affect their career. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader contended that, the anticipatory bail petition came to be rejected by the Sessions Court on the ground that these petitioners are proclaimed offenders in terms of Section 82 of Cr.P.C. and they are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Prem Shankar Prasad v. State of Bihar and another reported in 2021 SCC O nline SC 955 as rightly relied upon by the Sessions Court. It is his further submission that there is specific overt act alleged against these petitioners of putting fire to sugarcane crop of the complainant and his relatives and causing loss of crop to the tune of Rs.75,000/- and Rs.25,000/-. There is prima facie case against these petitioners for the offences alleged against them. If the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, there are chances of they threatening the complainant and -8- CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022 other prosecution witnesses and committing similar offences. With this, he prayed to reject the petition.
6. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court has gone through the charge sheet records and the documents produced by the petitioners.
7. Charge sheet came to be filed against these petitioners and their parents and a case came to be registered in CC No.67/2021 for offences under Sections 323, 354B, 435, 5904 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. Accused No.1 came to be arrested and subsequently he has been granted bail. Subsequently accused No.2 also came to be arrested and she has also been granted bail by the trial Court. The petitioners are the daughters of accused Nos.1 and 2. The accusation leveled against these petitioners is similar to that of accused Nos.1 and 2. The offences alleged against these petitioners are -9- CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022 not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The petitioners are women aged 23 and 21 years and they are studying and pursing their academic examinations and have applied for job. The proclamation against the petitioners are not duly executed as noted in the order sheet dated 02.08.2022 and therefore, they cannot be declared as proclaimed offenders under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. When the petitioners have not been declared as proclaimed offenders, their petition seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. can be considered. The petitioners have undertaken to appear before the jurisdictional court and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.
8. The main apprehension of the prosecution is that, if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, there is threat to the complainant and other prosecution witnesses and chances of they committing similar offences, can be met with by imposing stringent conditions.
- 10 -
CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022
9. In the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the counsel, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for granting anticipatory bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in C.C. No.38/2022 pending on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, JMFC, Jamkhandi (Crime No.70/2020 of Savalagi Police Station) subject to the following conditions:
i. The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
- 11 -CRL.P No. 103789 of 2022
ii. The petitioners shall voluntarily appear before the jurisdictional Court within fifteen days from this day and execute bail bond and furnish surety.
iii. The petitioners shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iv. The petitioners shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing, unless exempted, and co-operate in speedy disposal of the case.
Sd/-
JUDGE kmv