Karnataka High Court
Smt. Meenakshi vs State By Maddur Police on 30 June, 2014
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3603/2014
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Meenakshi,
W/o. Ramesh,
Aged about 35 years,
R/at New Extension,
Shivapura, Koppa Circle,
Maddur Town,
Mandya District-571 428.
2. Ramesha,
S/o. Panchegowda,
Aged about 45 years,
Employee in BSNL,
R/at New Extension,
Shivapura, Koppa Circle,
Maddur Town,
Mandya District-571 428. .. PETITIONERS
(By Sri. Raju.C.N, Adv.)
AND:
State by Maddur Police,
Mandya, Rep by SPP,
High Court of Karnataka at
Bangalore-560 001. .. RESPONDENT
(By Sri. B.J Eswarappa, HCGP)
2
This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of the
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event
of his arrest in Cr. No.114/2014 of Maddur P.S., for the
offences punishable under Sections 323, 327 and 504 read
with Section 34 of IPC.
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court
made the following :
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking a direction to the respondent police that in the event of their arrest, they be released on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 323, 327 and 504 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.114/2014.
2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, during the course of the arguments, submitted that there are case and counter cases. The present petitioners filed a complaint earlier to the complaint filed by the complainant 3 of this case, which is registered in Crime No.112/2014 for the alleged offences under Sections 506, 504, 143, 147, 323, 327 read with section 149 of IPC. He also submitted that because of petitioners' complaint was filed first, as a counter complaint, the complainant also filed a complaint subsequently against the petitioners. Hence, he submitted that by imposing reasonable conditions, the petitioners may be admitted to bail.
4. As against this, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State, during the course of the arguments, submitted that there is material against the petitioners about their involvement in the commission of the alleged offence. Hence, the petition may be rejected.
5. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and the other materials on record.
6. One Gowramma, the complainant herein, lodged a complaint alleging that on 12.3.2014 at about 9.00 p.m., as 4 usual, she went to compound to take water from the tap. Earlier to that date, in the afternoon, quarrel took place between the complainant and petitioner No.1 at the time of washing clothes. Petitioner No.1 started abusing the complainant by using filthy language and she has also assaulted the complainant on her head and body with hands. Petitioner No.2 came to the spot and assaulted the complainant with hands and kicked her with his legs. At the point of time, neighbors came and rescued her. On the basis of the complaint, case has been registered against the petitioners.
7. Learned Counsel for the petitioners produced a copy of the FIR and complaint which is lodged by petitioner No.1 against the complainant of this case which is first in time registered in Crime No.112/2014. I have perused the date and time of the incident in both the FIRs, they are one and the same. Therefore, it goes to show that there are case and counter case against both sides. Therefore, it is for the trial court to ascertain after recording evidence as to who are the aggressors and who have initiated the incident at the 5 first instance. Looking to the alleged offence, they are exclusively triable by the Court of Magistrate and the alleged offences are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. In view of these facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that by imposing reasonable conditions, the petitioners can be admitted to bail.
8. In the result, the petition is allowed. The respondent police are directed to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 327 and 504 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.114/2014, subject to the following conditions:
I. Each petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) and shall offer one surety for the likesum to the concerned Magistrate Court.
II. The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for the purpose of interrogation, whenever called upon to do so. III. The petitioners shall not intimidate or tamper with prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
6IV. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistrate Court within thirty days from the date of this order and shall execute personal bond as well as surety bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE Cs/-