Dyavegowda @ Mogannagowda vs State

C.R. Kumaraswamy, J.—This Criminal Petition is filed u/s 438 praying to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in Cr. No. 20/11 of Arakalagudu Police Station, pending on the file of C.J. and JMFC, Arakalagudu, which is registered for the offence punishable u/s 302, 304-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of D.P. Act.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned High Court Government Pleader for State.

The contents of the FIR found in the record discloses that Arakalagudu police have registered a case in Crime No. 20/11 against accused Nos. 1 to 5 for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 304-B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act on the complaint of Somashekar, S/o Subbegowda.

The complainant is the brother of deceased. He has stated in his complaint that the deceased Savitha was given in marriage to accused A D Ramesh. At the time of marriage 250 grams of gold, two lakhs worth cash and one Hero Honda were given by way of dowry. Three months after the marriage the accused were demanding Rs. 2,00.000/- from her parents house. In this regard they used to harass her. Thereafter parents of the deceased gave Rs. 50,000/--. Accused were not satisfied. Again on 26.12.2010 complainant''s sister was subjected to harassment and in this connection she was admitted to the Government hospital. Thereafter panchayath was held between the accused and the family members of the deceased and she was sent to the matrimonial home. Thereafter on 11.1.2011 the accused No. 1 telephoned to the parents of the deceased and threatened that in case if they do not send Savitha to his house he will commit suicide. That on 14.1.2011 the complainant enquired with Savitha and she complained that all the accused were abusing her. But the complainant consoled her. That on 14.1.2011 at 1.00 p.m. somebody telephoned to complainant saying that his sister Savitha have been lulled by his brother-in-law and their family members, then he proceeded to the house of the deceased and found that in the kitchen dead body of the Savitha was found and she has been hanged by means of a veil to the roof.

After completion of the investigation the Investigating Officer has laid chargesheet against accused Nos. 1 to 5. It is alleged in the chargesheet that on 14.1.2011 at about 1.00 p.m. somebody telephoned to the complainant and informed that his elder sister Savitha have been killed by his brother-in-law and their family members, then he proceeded to the house of the deceased and found Savitha by means of a veil has tied her neck, consequently she died. The investigating agency has laid chargesheet against accused for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A. 304-B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act.

It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that Petitioner is father-in-law of the deceased. At the time of incident he was not present at the spot. The main offence alleged against the Petitioner is u/s 304B i.e., dowry death. This offence is punishable with imprisonment for not less than 7 years. In this case the main accused i.e., the accused No. 1 is in judicial custody. This Petitioner is father in law and is aged about 60 years. The learned Counsel for Petitioner submitted that the statement of the witness is in the form of omnibus statement alleging offence against all the accused. There is a force in the submission of learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Though the offence has taken place on 14.1.2011 and the Petitioner is aged about 60 years till today the police were not able to trace the Petitioner or arrest the accused. In view of the inaction of the Respondent police in arresting the Petitioner in this crime.

I feel it is of no use to dismiss the petition filed by the Petitioner. Therefore, in my view if the Petitioner is granted with anticipatory bail it will enable the police to proceed further. Hence the Petitioner is entitled for bail.

In the result, I pass the following:

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is allowed conditionally. The Petitioner is granted with anticipatory bail The Respondent-Police are directed co release the Petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 20/11 of the Respondent police on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Respondent police on the following conditions:

i) The Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses nor hamper the investigation in any manner.

ii) He shall mark his attendance before the Respondent police once in a month till commencement of the trial.

iii) He shall not jump the bail.

iv) If any of the conditions is violated, the anticipatory bail entails cancellation.

v) Intimate the concerned accordingly.