Dismissed

Sri.Anand S/O Narasappa v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Aug 2017CRL.P/200804/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Kalaburagi dismissed a bail application under Section 439 CrPC. The court held that prima facie evidence showed the petitioner caused harassment and ill-treatment leading to the wife's suicide via burning, making him ineligible for bail until the charge sheet was filed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner convicted of charges Sections 498A, 306 IPC, Section 34 IPC granted bail denied. Application dismissed.

Sri.Anand S/O Narasappa Vs State of Karnataka — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2017

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.200804/2017

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sri Anand S/o Narasappa Mallappol Aged: 35 years, Occ: Agriculture R/o: Konkal village Tq. and Dist. Yadgiri

¶9

... Petitioner

¶10

(By Sri Ganesh Naik, Advocate)

¶11

And:

¶12

State of Karnataka through SHO Gurmitkal Police Station Dist: Yadgiri Represented by Addl. SPP High Court of Karnataka Kalaburagi Bench

¶13

... Respondent

¶14

(By Sri P.S. Patil, HCGP)

¶15

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to allow the petition thereby enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.128/2017 registered by the Gurmitkal Police Station, Dist: Yadgiri, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 R/w 34 of IPC.

¶16

¶17

This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:-

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail in Crime No.128/2017 of Gurmitkal Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 R/w Section 34 of IPC.

¶20

2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint

¶21

are that, the marriage of the daughter of complainant was performed about 9 years back with accused No.1. Thereafter, they led happy marital life and out of their wedlock, they begotten two children. Later, accused No.1 addicted to consume the liquor and used to assault and abuse his wife and his family members and also gave mental torture. The daughter of the complainant used to say regarding the torture given by accused No.1 and his family members, whenever she used to visit her parental house. In that light, on

¶22

¶23

01.06.2017 during the night hours, for silly reasons accused No.1 quarreled with the daughter of the complainant Anita and assaulted her. On the same day, the parents of the deceased also advised accused No.1. On 02.06.2017 at about 7.30 a.m., the father of the deceased went to Hanuman temple in the village. At that time, the villagers started running towards the house of the deceased Anita and he himself also went to his daughter’s house and saw that accused No.1 was going out of the house and his daughter by pouring kerosene on herself along with her two children tried to ablaze and as a result of the same, she herself and her daughter Geeta sustained the burn injuries and the persons gathered there extinguished the fire and took them to the hospital. Subsequently, the said Anita and her daughter Geeta died due to the burn injuries. As such, the complaint was lodged and on the basis of the said complaint, a case has been registered against the accused persons.

¶24

¶25

I have heard the learned counsel for the

¶26

petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State.

¶27

The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence. It is further contended that only because of the silly reasons, the deceased Anita has poured kerosene on herself and her two children and thereafter she herself has ablazed. As a result of the same, she sustained burn injuries and succumbed to the said injuries. It is further contended that there is no ill-treatment and harassment caused by the petitioner. It is further contended that there is no demand of dowry by the petitioner. It is further contended that the remaining accused persons have been already released on bail and even on the ground of parity, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. It is further contended that the alleged offences are not

¶28

¶29

punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is further contended that the petitioner is having deep root in the society and he has got both movable and immovable properties, therefore there is no chance of he being absconded. It is further contended that if the petitioner is released on bail, he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.

¶30

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would contend that the petitioner is the main accused. Prior to the alleged incident i.e., on 01.06.2017 during night hours, he quarreled with the deceased Anita and on the next day at about 7.30 a.m., because of the ill-treatment and harassment caused by the petitioner she poured kerosene on herself and her two children and thereafter ablaze and as a result of the same, she and one child

¶31

¶32

died. There is prima facie material as against the petitioner to show that, because of the harassment caused by the petitioner the deceased committed suicide by burning. It is further contended that the investigation is still in progress and at this juncture, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may abscond and he may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶33

I have gone through the copy of the complaint

¶34

and the other material produced along with the petition.

¶35

By going through the contents of the complaint and other material, it indicates that the petitioner is addicted to bad habits and he used to abuse and assault the deceased. In that light, on 01.06.2017 during night hours, he quarreled with the deceased Anita and also assaulted her and as a result of the same, on 02.06.2017 at about 7.30 a.m., the deceased Anita by pouring kerosene on herself and on

¶36

¶37

her two children ablaze herself and as a result of the same, she and one child died. There is prima facie material as against the petitioner to show that because of the ill-treatment and harassment caused by him the deceased committed suicide and as such, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶38

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file the bail application after the charge sheet is filed.

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

¶40

LG Ct: VK

Sri.Anand S/O Narasappa v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Anand S/O Narasappa v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kareppa S/O Erappa Pujari and Ors. Vs the State through

Ibrahim Nadaf and Ors. Vs the State through

Ravikant S/O Shankreppa Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Karnataka

Gopal S/O Bhavanrao Parit Vs Smt.Saraswati W/O Gopal Parit and Ors.

C Venugopal and Anr. Vs State of Karnataka

Ramachandra S/O Layappa Kalle and Another Vs M/S Neeta Tours and Travels and Ors.