Allowed

Mahadevappa S/O Devarajappa Pujar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Sept 2023CRL.A/100385/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal filed by the father of the accused, granting him regular bail in a case involving alleged atrocities and matrimonial disputes. The court held that since the complainant settled with the son and the son was granted bail, the appellant is entitled to bail.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted to the appellant accused No.2 on execution of personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties for like amount and compliance with specific conditions regarding investigation and cour

Mahadevappa S/O Devarajappa Pujar Vs the State of Karnataka — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10317 CRL.A No. 100385 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶4

DHARWAD BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶8

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100385 OF 2023 (U/S 14 A(2) of SC and ST ACT-)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MAHADEVAPPA S/O DEVARAJAPPA PUJAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HALAGERI, TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI. NAGANGOUDA R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR CHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANI LAXMANKATTIMANIDate: 2023.09.12 14:46:15 +0530

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS HALAGERI POLICE STATION, TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI, (REP. BY ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH)

¶16

PREETHI

¶17

W/O DEVARAJ PUJAR, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. SOG COLONY, C BLOCK, D.NO.37, DAVANAGERE, DIST: DAVANAGERE-581116.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1, SRI. PRASHANT MATHAPATI, ADV. FOR R2)

¶19

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10317 CRL.A No. 100385 of 2023

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT 2015 R/W 438 OF CR.PC., SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 26.07.2023 PASSED BY I ADDL DIST AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, HAVER IN HALAGERI P.S.CRIME NO. 94/2023 AND TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO THE APPELLANT WHO IS THE ACCUSED NO. 2 IN CRIME NO. 94/2023 IN HALAGERI POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 323, 420, 498-A, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND ALSO UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC 3(2) (va), 3(1)(r) OF THE SC/ST ACT 1989 AND ALSO FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT 1961 AND TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS JUST AND PROPER.

¶21

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal is filed under Section 14A(2) of The

¶24

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST Act') by the appellant, who is arrayed as accused No.2 seeking bail in Crime No.94/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 420, 498A, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3(2)(v-a), 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶25

The complainant is Smt.Preethi, who is no other than

¶26

the wife of the appellant/accused No.1. In the complaint, she has

¶27

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10317 CRL.A No. 100385 of 2023

¶28

stated that she and appellant/accused No.1 were working in Avantaki Reliance Company since 2020 and fell in love and later on got married on 31.03.2023. After the marriage, they lived together. Though initially appellant/accused No.1 took good care of her, later on he stared harassing and ill-treating her to get dowry and also abused her referring to her caste. On 15.04.2023, he abused her in filthy language and also referring to her caste. It is also alleged that without her knowledge, appellant/accused No.1 has transferred Rs.50,000/- from her account to the account of his friend Mohammad Rafiq through cell phone. He has also drawn Rs.10,000/- through her ATM card. He abused her and gave threat to her life. On 05.05.2023, appellant/accused No.1 left the house without intimating anyone. On 03.06.2023, he tried to get the matter settled by offering to pay Rs.4 lakhs and get her relationship severed. A threat was also given to her and her relatives. Appellant who is no other than the father of accused No.1 also gave mental harassment to the complainant.

¶29

Based on the complaint, respondent No.1 police have

¶30

registered the case in Crime No.94/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 420, 498A, 504, 506 read with

¶31

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10317 CRL.A No. 100385 of 2023

¶32

Section 34 IPC and Sections 3(2)(v-a), 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Appellant/accused No.2 was arrested on 27.06.2023. Since then he is in judicial custody. His bail application came to be rejected by the I Addl.District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Haveri. Being aggrieved by the same, appellant/accused No.2 has approached this Court contending that he is innocent of the offences alleged. The allegations made against him are baseless and false. Complainant/respondent No.2 has left the matrimonial home and has filed a false complaint. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Already accused No.1 is granted bail by this Court in Crl.A.No.100322/2023. Appellant/accused No.2 is ready and willing to abide by the conditions that may be imposed.

¶33

Learned High Court Government Pleader has submitted his oral objections.

¶34

After due service of notice, respondent No.2 has appeared through the counsel. In Crl.A.No.100322/2023 filed by accused No.1, on 24.07.2023, complainant/respondent No.2 was

¶35

¶36

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10317 CRL.A No. 100385 of 2023

¶37

present before the Court and submitted that she has no objection for granting of bail to appellant/accused No.1.

¶38

Heard the arguments and perused the records.

¶39

Appellant/accused No.2 is the father of accused No.1,

¶40

who is the husband of the complainant/respondent No.2. From the material placed on record, it is evident that the appellant/accused No.1 and the complainant/respondent No.2 were colleagues, working at Avantaki Reliance Company. They fell in love and got married. It appears that subsequently the relationship between them became strained and ultimately the complainant chose to file a complaint alleging the offences punishable under Sections 323, 420, 498A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Though the offences are non-bailable, they are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. The case was registered on 04.06.2023 and by now, it would be expectable that there is reasonable progress in the investigation. The main allegations are against accused No.1. The allegations against appellant/accused No.2 who is the father-in-law of complainant are that he mentally harassed her. Having regard to

¶41

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10317 CRL.A No. 100385 of 2023

¶42

the fact that now the complainant appears to have settled with the appellant/accused No.1 and already regular bail is granted to him, this Court is of the considered opinion that appellant/accused No.2 is also entitled for bail, subject to conditions. Accordingly, the

¶43

following:

¶44

ORDER

¶45

Criminal Appeal is hereby allowed.

¶46

The impugned order dated 14.06.2023 passed by the

¶47

learned I Addl. District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Haveri, is set-aside.

¶48

The appellant/accused No.2 is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.94/2023 of Halageri Police Station, subject to following conditions: