Karnataka High Court
Syed Zainulabideen vs State Of Karnataka on 15 September, 2022
Author: K. Natarajan
Bench: K. Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8635 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. SYED ZAINULABIDEEN
@ SYED JAINUL ABHIDIN
S/O S M AHMED
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
2. HABEEBUNNISA
@ SMT. SABEEHA
W/O SYED MUKHTIAR AHMED
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF
NO.177/2, 14TH MAIN, YASEEN NAGAR
HBR LAYOUT, II BLOCK,
BANGALORE - 560043.
3. SYEDA NASEEBUNNISA
@ SMT. NAJMA
W/O SYED MUHEEB S G
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDENT OF FLAT NO.C-4
ELEGANT ELITE, 3RD FLOOR
3RD MAIN ROAD, M S H LAYUOT
NEAR SHIRDI SAI TEMPLE,
ANAND NAGAR
BANGALORE - 560024
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.ABDUL WAJID S A., ADVOCATE)
2
AND
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER
INSPECTOR OF POLICE
K G HALLI, POLICE STATION
BANGALORE - 560043
2 . STATION HOUSE OFFICER
INSPECTOR OF POLICE
WOMEN POLICE STATION
(MAHILA POLICE THANE)
RAMANAGARA
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
REP. BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE - 560001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.KRISHNA KUMAR K.K., HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON
BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.89/2022
OF RAMANAGARA WOMEN P.S., RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 506,34,498A,504,355,307,323 OF
IPC AND SEC.3,4 OF D.P ACT ON THE FILE OF THE
PRL.CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND C.J.M COURT, RAMANAGARA
DISTRICT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 3 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.89/2022 registered by Ramanagara Women Police Station, Ramangara, for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 498A, 504, 355, 307, 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent- State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that one Smt.Hajira Arbin Taj, wife of petitioner No.1/accused No.1, filed complaint in the Police station on 22.07.2022 alleging that her marriage with accused No.1 was held on 01.07.2018. At the time of marriage, they said to have given huge cash and gold ornaments to the accused as dowry. She was looked after properly for a period of three months by the accused. Thereafter, the accused started giving mental and physical harassment to her and 4 demanding additional dowry. When she informed her father about the same, her father and other family members have advised the accused to lookafter her properly. Thereafter, as she was carrying pregnancy, her father took her to her parental house. She gave birth to a girl child. Thereafter, as the accused refused and neglected to take her back to their house, the father of the complainant took her to the house of the accused. Even thereafter the accused started harassing her both mentally and physically and threatened her to kill her as she could not get site from her father.
On 03.07.2022, accused No.2 assaulted the complainant with hands and accused No.1 squeezed her neck with an intention to kill her. Thereafter, the complainant escaped and went outside the house and informed the same to her father over telephone. Subsequently, her father informed the same to the police and rescued the complainant. After filing of complaint, the police are making hectic efforts to arrest the petitioners.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, it reveals that there are allegations against the petitioners for having received dowry 5 and other gold ornaments at the time of marriage, and thereafter, they started to harass the complainant both physically and mentally demanding additional dowry.
5. Though the panchayat was held, the accused did not take the complainant to their house, subsequently, the father of the complainant took her to the house of the accused. Thereafter, the accused started harassing the complainant and attempted to commit murder by squeezing her neck on 03.07.2022. Though the alleged incident took place on 03.07.2022, the complaint came to be filed on 27.07.2022. After the date of incident, they were called by the police for settlement in the police station, thereafter, complaint was lodged.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no wound certificate showing any serious injury on the complainant who got her neck squeezed by accused No.1. The offences are though non bailable but are not exclusively punishable with death/imprisonment for life and are triable by the Magistrate.
6
7. Considering the background that the petitioner No.1 is ready to take back the complainant for leading a happy marital life, sending the accused to police custody will not serve the purpose and it will lead to cause further disturbance in their marital life. Therefore, in the interest of justice and uniting the family, by imposing certain conditions, if the petitioner is released on bail, no prejudice would be caused to the case of prosecution. Hence, the following:
ORDER The Criminal Petition is allowed.
The respondent - Police are directed to release the petitioners-accused No.1 to 3 on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.89/2022 registered by Ramanagara Women Police Station, Ramangara, for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 498A, 504, 355, 307, 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each with two 7 sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;
(ii) Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order;
(iii) Petitioners shall not indulge in similar offences strictly;
(iv) Petitioners shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses;
(v) Petitioners shall be deemed to be in custody for the purpose of recovery under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act for getting specimen signature for the purpose of expert's opinion;
(vi) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for the purpose of investigation.
(vii) Petitioner No.1/Accused No.1 shall appear before the Investigating Officer and mark his attendance on every Monday between 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. for a period of three months or till filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier.
If any of the bail conditions is violated, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE BSR