Ayub Pasha and Others vs State of Karnataka

Hon''ble Mr. Justtce H. Billappa

The petitioners have filed this petition u/s 438 of Cr.P.C praying for grant of anticipatory bail.

It is stated in the petition, the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against them and they have been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioners 5 and 6 are staying with their husbands, petitioners 2 to 4 are residing separately and petitioners 8 and 9 are aged persons. The petitioners are ready to furnish surety. Therefore, the petitioners have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

It is alleged, the marriage between the complainant and the first petitioner took place about one year and eight months back. At the time of marriage, cash and gold articles were given. Within few months, the petitioners treated the complainant with cruelty demanding dowry to purchase the house, two wheeler and for business. The complainant informed her parents. They advised the first petitioner. The other petitioners abused the complainant and threatened her with dire consequences. About two months back, the complainant was sent out and she is residing with her parents. A case in Crime No. 117/2010 has been registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After investigation charge sheet has been filed.

The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against them and they have been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioners 2 to 7 are residing separately and Petitioners 8 and 9 are aged persons and therefore, the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail.

As against this, the learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that after investigation charge sheet has been filed and the petitioners were not available for investigation and therefore, the petitioners cannot be granted anticipatory bail.

I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

The point that arises for consideration is;

Whether the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail?

it is relevant to note, the allegations are the marriage between the first petitioner and the complainant took place about one year and eight months back. At the time of marriage, cash and gold article were given. After some time, the petitioners treated the complainant with cruelty demanding dowry. About two months back, the complainant was sent out and she is residing with her parents. After investigation charge sheet has been filed. The complaint was lodged on 10.06.2010. The petitioners were not available for the investigation. Now, the petitioners have approached this Court. Therefore, the petitioners cannot be granted anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the bail petition is rejected.