Muniraju vs State Of Karnataka By on 15 July, 2015

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Muniraju vs State Of Karnataka By on 15 July, 2015

Bench: L.Narayana Swamy

                           1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2015

                       BEFORE

   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY


       CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3231 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

MUNIRAJU
S/O CHINNAPPA,
AGD ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT MANGAPURA
KASABA HOBLI,
MALUR TALUK - 563130
KOLAR DISTRICT.
                                    ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. LEELADHAR H P, ADV.)

AND

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
MALUR POLICE STATION
MALUR
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130
                                   ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. B. J. ESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
                                 2




    THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETR. ON BAIL IN CR. NO.99/2015 OF
MALUR P.S., KOLAR, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A
AND 306 R/W 34 OF IPC; AND ETC.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

                         ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent.

2. Petitioner herein is accused No.1 in Crime No.99/2015 registered by Malur police station, Kolar, for the offences punishable under sections 498A, 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

3. The case on hand is based on the complaint lodged by the father of the deceased daughter whose body was found on 2.04.2015 in the tank. In the complaint it is alleged by the complainant that this petitioner accused No.1 along with other accused Nos.2 to 4 have committed 3 abetment forcing her daughter to commit suicide. The reason for forcing the daughter to take such extreme step is that he had illicit relationship with a lady and he wanted the consent to marry that lady. In this regard he was consistently harassing the deceased. A case came to be registered by the respondent police against this petitioner accused No.1 and his family members.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused No.1 is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case due to the mis-understanding between accused No.3 and the complainant. He further submits that petitioner-accused No.1 parents and sister have been granted with bail by the court below. Accordingly petitioner prays for grant of bail.

4. Per contra, learned HCGP opposes the petition contending that there is prima facie case against this petitioner-accused No.1 as he has illicit relationship with a 4 lady and he was interested in marrying that lady. Hence he requests to dismiss this petition.

5. I have gone through the papers made available before me and I find that the deceased committed suicide on 31.03.2015 and her body was found on 2.04.2015 in a tank and it is the compliant that A1 to A4 have committed abetment. Since the investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed, no useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner and no person has claimed as eye- witness to the alleged incident. Taking into consideration that he would obey any conditions which may be imposed on him, discretion is exercised in favour of the present petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail in Crime No.99/2015 of respondent police subject to the following conditions:

1) He shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.75,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

2) He shall not hold out threat to prosecution witnesses or tamper with evidence;

3) He shall attend the court on all dates of hearing, except under unavoidable circumstances;

If he violates any of the above conditions, prosecution will be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.

SD/-

JUDGE HR

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court