High CourtsSingle Bench

Mr. Mohamed Ahamedulla vs State of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 20 April 2012 · Citation: (2012) 04 KAR CK 0065

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.N. Keshavanarayana, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 323, 34, 498A, 506
CASE NUMBER
Criminal P. No. 1762 of 2012
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 712 words

K.N. Keshavanarayana

1.

The petitioner is arraigned as accused No 1 in Crime No. 64/11 of Gulpet Police Station, Kolar registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the D.P. Act. According to the prosecution, on the basis of complaint lodged by Salma Sultana wife of this petitioner, on 20.7.2011, the aforesaid case came to be registered and investigation was taken up. In the complaint, it was inter alia alleged that at the time of the marriage which was solemnized on 27.9.2009, this petitioner and his relatives demanded and accepted huge dowry both in cash and kind and not being satisfied with the said dowry, subsequent to the marriage she was coerced to bring further dowry and she was being subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with demand for dowry and she was physically tortured both by this petitioner and other relatives and was driven out of the matrimonial home. It was further alleged in the complaint that on 18.7.2011 at about 6.40 or 7.00 p.m. this petitioner came to the parental home of the complainant, demanded complainant to give custody of the child and when she refused, he threatened to kill her and also tried to press her neck by his hands and on hearing the cries, the neighbours came to her rescue.

2.

According to the petitioner, as on 18.7.2011, he was not in India and he was in Birmingham, U.K., studying his Post Graduation Diploma in Business Management in Finance and Management Business School, Victoria Square, Birmingham and he returned to India after completion of the course on 13.1.2012 and thereafter learnt about registration of the case by the respondent-Police. Immediately, he approached the learned Sessions Judge seeking relief of anticipatory bail. However, the same came to be rejected. Therefore, he is before this Court.

3.

The petition is opposed by the respondent -State.

4.

I have heard both sides. Perused the records made available.

5.

Admittedly, the petitioner has been arraigned as accused No. 1 in the case registered by respondent-Police. It appears after completing investigation, charge sheet has also been filed and is pending in C.C.No. 574/11 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Kolar, in which this petitioner has been arraigned as accused No. 1. Therefore, apprehension of the petitioner that he is likely to be arrested is well founded.

6.

In support of his contention that from 14.9.2010 to 13.1.2012, he was out of this country and was studying in Finance and Management Business School of Birmingham, he has produced copy of the letter from the said School and also copies of Passport which prima facie indicate that the petitioner left India on 14.9.2010 and on completion of the course came back to India on 13.1.2012 and he attended class in the aforesaid School on 18.7.2011. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the materials available on record at this stage, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner is guilty of any of the offences alleged. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the relief of anticipatory bail. Hence, the petition is allowed. The respondent - Gulpet Police Station, Kolar, are directed to release the petitioner herein on bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with case in Crime No. 64/11 of the said Police Station (C.C.No. 574/11 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Kolar), on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and subject to further condition that within 15 days from the date of such arrest and release, the petitioner shall appear before jurisdictional Magistrate and on such appearance, the learned Magistrate is directed to release the petitioner on bail on the conditions contained herein:

i) The petitioner shall not, tamper or terrorise the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in any acts similar to the one alleged in the case.

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on all hearing dates without fail and

iv) He shall not go out of India without permission of the trial Court.