Sri. Althaf @ Althaf Hussain vs State of Karnataka

Budihal R.B., J.—This is the petition filed by the petitioner - accused No. 1 u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B r/w. Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered by the respondent - police in Crime No. 75/2013. The brief facts of the case that one M.G. Dhastagiri Sab, S/o. M.G. Ghouse Sab has lodged the complaint before the police alleging that complainant daughter by name Nazeema was married to first accused - Althaf @ Althaf Hussain as per the Muslim customs in the presence of the Jamatdara and in the said wedlock the couples got child aged 4 months. On 11-05-2013 at 3.30 p.m. he received the information through his mobile from the neighbour of the house of his daughter, that his daughter Nazeema committed suicide by hanging herself. Immediately, when the complainant visited to Government Hospital, Hosanagara, his daughter died. He could not find any clue regarding his daughter hanging herself and committing suicide. It is further alleged that on 10-05-2013 his daughter had come to his house and informed him regarding all the accused Nos. 1 to 5 subjecting her to physical and mental harassment. However, advised his daughter and sent her to the house of her husband with better hopes and further alleged that on 11-05-2013, Nazeema hanged herself and died due to the physical and mental harassment given by the accused Nos. 1 to 5 and her husband Althaf. On the basis of the said complaint, case has been registered.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner - accused No. 1 and also learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his argument submitted that looking to the averments made in the complaint there are no allegations regarding demand for dowry amount and even looking to the statement of witnesses who have been recorded on 12-05-2013, in their statement also there is no allegation that the petitioner was demanding dowry from the deceased and giving ill-treatment in connection with the dowry amount. Learned counsel also made the submission that it is only on 30-07-2013 i.e., after two months when the statement of other witnesses have been recorded, the prosecution has come up with the theory of demand for dowry and to make it as a dowry death case. He also made the submission that the four accused persons have been granted with bail. Hence, submitted that the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. By imposing any reasonable conditions, petitioner may be admitted to bail.

As against this, the learned High Court Government Pleader during the course of his argument submitted that perusing the statement of witnesses there is a clear allegation that the accused persons used to give ill-treatment both physically and mentally to the deceased and it is because of the ill-treatment given to her by the accused persons she committed suicide. Hence, he submitted that there is a prima-facie material placed by the prosecution to show the involvement of the petitioner - accused and hence he submitted to reject the bail petition.

I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR complaint, order passed by the lower Court and also the order passed by this Court in respect of other four accused persons. Looking to the order passed in Crl.P. No. 7264/2013, dated 20-12-2013, two accused persons were granted with anticipatory bail and perusing the order passed in Crl.P. No. 6341/2013 dated 12-11-2013, this Court granted bail to another two accused persons u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. Perusing the averments and the allegations made in the complaint, it is no doubt true that there is a mention that there used to be ill-treatment to the deceased. But there is no specific allegation made in the complaint that the petitioner or other accused persons used to demand dowry amount from the deceased and in connection with the dowry amount they used to give ill-treatment to the deceased. Even perusing the statement of witnesses CW''s-2 to 5, their statements are also to the same effect that there was a galata in the house and when they went there they saw the deceased had committed suicide by hanging. Therefore, looking to the materials on record that there is a similar allegations made against all the five accused persons that there used to be ill-treatment by the accused to the deceased. This Court considering the merits of the case ultimately granted bail to four accused persons. The present petitioner though he may be the husband of the deceased, but so far as the allegations are concerned, he is similarly placed. On the ground of parity, the present petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioner - accused No. 1 is ordered to be released on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B r/w. Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered by the respondent - police in Crime No. 75/2013, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court;

(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.