Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kancharla Gowtham vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 26 November, 2020
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5282 OF 2020
ORDER:-
This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") to enlarge the petitioner/A-1 on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 317 of 2020 of Kovvur Police Station, West Godavari District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498- A, 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. The case of prosecution is that a complaint was lodged on 01.10.2020 stating that on 06.11.2019, at Kovvur the de facto complainant was engaged the petitioner/A-1 and their marriage was performed on 30.01.2020 as per Christian customs. Before the marriage and after the marriage they demanded for dowry. It is stated in the complaint that several amounts were given to her in-laws, but without satisfying with the same, they used to harass her. The specific allegations against the petitioner is that he used to come home in drunken state, abuse her and consume some tablets and made her consume the same against her will. She faced physical and mental harassment in the hands of A-1 and her in-laws. When the petitioner was transferred to Adilabad, he demanded 15 lakhs, car, A.C etc., to take her to Adilabad. Later mediations had taken place between the parties, but in vain. Her in-laws have also threatened her that in case she come back to stay with her husband, they would kill her. Basing on the complaint, the above crime was registered. 2
3. Heard Sri Sreenivasa Rao Velivela, learned counsel for the petitioner/A-1 and learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent- State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the de facto complainant and the petitioner lived as wife and husband only for few days. Several times counseling was done by the police, but in vain. He submits that all the other accused were granted anticipatory bail and that the allegations against the petitioner are under Sections 498-A and 377 IPC. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Navtej Singh Johar Vs. Union of India1 quashed Section 377 IPC. In view of that, as the only allegation against the petitioner is under Section 498-A IPC and the punishment for the said offence is below seven years, he is entitled for notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. He further submits that his father A-2 is suffering with cancer and recently undergone surgery. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest and with that pressure he is not able to take care of his family. Further he is working as Assistant Branch Manager in State Bank of India, Narnoor, Adilabad District.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is in progress and there are specific allegations against the petitioner.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. The punishment for the offence under Section 498-A IPC is below seven years, the police are bound to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 41-A 1 2018(10) SCC 1 3 Cr.P.C and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar2. Hence, the police shall follow the guidelines scrupulously or else it will be viewed very seriously.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J Date :26.11.2020 KA 2 (2014) 8 SCC 273 4 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI (Disposed of) CRIMINAL PETITION No.5282 of 2020 26.11.2020 KA