Karnataka High Court
Sri. Shivakumara M L vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 November, 2021
Author: K. Natarajan
Bench: K. Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8198 OF 2021
BETWEEN
SRI. SHIVAKUMARA M L
S/O LATE LOKESH
AGED 23 YEARS
MADAPATNA VILLAGE AND POST
KUSHALNAGAR
SOMWARPET TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT- 34
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRATHEEP K.C., ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY KUSHALNAGARA RURAL POLICE STATION
KODAGU DISTRICT
REP BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU 560001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.100/2021
REGISTERED BY KUSHALNAGAR POLICE STATION, KODAGU
2
DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 306 R/W 34 OF
IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for granting anticipatory bail in Crime No.100/2021 registered by Kushalnagar Rural Police Station, Kodagu District for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 306 read with 34 of IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that complaint was registered against the husband of the deceased by one H.N.Swamy at Kushalnagar Rural Police Station, Kodagu District. The deceased Arpitha was said to be the daughter of his younger brother Suresh and she is said to have loved the petitioner and married him four months before the incident. Thereafter, she was found dead by hanging in bathroom and he has stated his suspicion about the 3 committing of the suicide and he also stated that accused NO.1 and his mother accused No.3 had assaulted her and they have suspected her fidelity as she became pregnant when she was in her parents house during Ashada. After facing the a UDR No.29/31 under Section 174 (3) and (IV) of Cr.P.C the police sent the dead body to the post mortem and after recording the statement of one Suresh, the father, Yahsodha and Mallika, the Investigating Officer came to conclusion that it was abatement to suicide. Therefore, the case was registered against the petitioner. The accused apprehending arrest in the hands of police, approached the Sessions Judge for grant of bail, which came to be rejected. Hence the petitioner is before this Court seeking for grant of bail.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the there is delay in lodging the complaint and absolutely no allegation against the petitioner. The marriage is the love marriage. She has committed suicide in the father's house. He is ready for investigation and ready for abiding any conditions for granting the bail. 4
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader objected the petition.
6. Upon considering the arguments and on perusal of the records which reveals the petitioner is said to have married the deceased by loving her and he is stated to be suspecting her fidelity as she became pregnant when she went to her parents house to the Ashada. Due to which she said to have committed suicide. The statement of the father is said to be recorded by the Tahasildar during the course of proceedings. However, the case is abatement of suicide and he suspected the fidelity of the deceased-wife. There is no allegation of dowry or demand of dowry is suspected for suicide. The complaint was also previously not lodged directly against the petitioner for abatement of suicide. But these are all recorded only after the inquest panchanama and recording statement by the investigating office and complaint came to be registered after one month of the suicide. Therefore without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, since the offence is not punishable with death or 5 imprisonment for life and the marriage is love marriage therefore by imposing certain conditions, the bail is granted, no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following order:
Order Criminal petition is allowed.
The respondent-police is directed to release the petitioners-accused Nos.1 on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.100/2021 registered by Kushalnagar Rural Police Station, Kodagu District, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 R/W 34 of IPC subject to the following conditions;
(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakhs only) each with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;
(ii) Petitioner shall surrender within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order;
(iii) Petitioner shall not indulge in similar offences strictly;6
(iv) Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses;
(v) Petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the purpose of recovery under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.
(vi) Petitioner 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 two months or till filing of the charge sheet whichever is later.
(vii) If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the application for seeking cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE AKV