Allowed

Susheela Bai v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 May 2022CRL.P/3670/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition sought regular bail for the accused mother-in-law charged with murder and abetment to suicide under various IPC sections for offences related to the victim's suicide via drowning allegations.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by executing personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sureties, complying with conditions of appearance, not leaving jurisdiction, and avoiding tampering with witnesses.

Susheela Bai Vs State of Karnataka — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF MAY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3670/2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SUSHEELA BAI W/O. GOPYA NAYAKA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT SRIRANGAPURA THANDA VILLAGE NAGALAMADIKE HOBLI PAVAGADA TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT PIN NO.561 202

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI G.NARASI REDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THIRUMANI P.S. PIN NO.561 202 REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. … RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI K.S.ABHIJITH, HCGP)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.7/2022 OF THIRUMANI P.S., TUMAKURU DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 302, 306, 323, 324, 504, 114 R/W

¶15

¶16

SECTION 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C AT PAVAGADA.

¶17

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

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crime No.7/2022 of Thirumani Police Station, Y.N. Hosakote Circle, Tumakuru, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 306, 323, 324, 504 and 114 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶20

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

¶21

The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that this petitioner is the mother-in-law of the victim and mother of the accused No.1, who is the husband of the victim and committed the offence of murder as well as abetting suicide of the victim, who committed suicide along with two children by jumping into the well. Hence, the police have registered the case and the matter is under investigation.

¶22

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this petitioner is in custody from 16.03.2022 and the only allegation against this petitioner is that she also subjected the victim for harassment i.e., the offence of abetment scolding her that she gave birth to a girl child and hence, the victim committed suicide. The counsel would also submit that, in the complaint, it is stated that, accused No.3 herself informed the fact that the victim is not in the house to accused No.1. Hence, it is clear that the offence under Sections 302 and 306 of IPC do not attract against the petitioner.

¶24

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that the witness, who made the statement before the police stated that this petitioner was there along with the accused and continuously scolded her that she beget only girl child. Hence, the victim took the extreme step of committing suicide.

¶25

Having heard the respective counsel and also on

¶26

perusal of the material available on record, particularly, the contents of the complaint as well as the statement of witness as

¶27

¶28

contended by the learned High Court Government Pleader and in order to invoke Section 302 of IPC, no such allegations are made in the complaint, except making an allegation with regard to abetment to commit suicide and the fact that this petitioner is the mother-in-law of the victim is not in dispute. When such being the factual aspects of the case and this petitioner is in custody from 16.03.2022, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., subject to imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:-

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the

¶31

petitioner/accused No.3 shall be released on bail in Crime No.7/2022 of Thirumani Police Station, Y.N. Hosakote Circle, Tumakuru, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 306, 323, 324, 504 and 114 read with Section 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:

¶32

(i) The petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs

¶33

¶34

only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶35

(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶36

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.

¶37

(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court, till the case registered against her is disposed of.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

Susheela Bai v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susheela Bai 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

Rakesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohan Kotiyan Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr N R Sugandaraju Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Manoj N Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Chandrashekara. M. B. Vs State by

Shreedhar Vs State by