TAYAMMA & Ors vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 6 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent-

police to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 504 and 306 read with section

149 of IPC registered in respondent police station Crime No.196/2017. The son of the deceased is the complainant in this case.

Heard the arguments of the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioners/accused on record and also the

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

Looking to the complaint averments, the brief facts of the prosecution case that the petitioners, who are the daughters and son-in-laws of

complainant''''s father Shivananjegowda, had claimed share in the properties held by him and filed a case claiming share in the property. On

06.09.2017 the said Shivananjegowda, who is the father of the complainant accompanied by large number of his villagers, whose names are also

mentioned in the complaint, went to Aresomanahalli village, where his daughter was residing and it is stated that at that place, the petitioners

namely, the daughters and son-in-laws of deceased Shivananjegowda, have insulted and pushed him and returned to his house, being insulted,

deceased committed suicide in the house. On the basis of the said complaint, case came to be registered for the alleged offence.

Even looking to the complaint averments, what is stated is that, the daughters and son-in-laws of the deceased have filed a suit claiming their

share in the properties, except that there is no other allegation in the complaint. Though it is contended that before the Panchayath, the petitioners

abused the deceased, but what are the abusive words used were also not found place in the complaint. Though it is the case of the prosecution that

the deceased left the death note, copy of which is produced by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, even looking to the contents of the

same, at this stage, there is no prima-facie allegations to show the involvement of the petitioners that there was an abetment by the petitioners to the

deceased to commit suicide. The petitioners have contended in the petition that they are innocent and not committed the alleged offence and they

have been falsely implicated in the case. The alleged offence under Section 306 of IPC is also not exclusively punishable with death or

imprisonment for life. Hence, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioners and to grant them anticipatory

bail.

Accordingly, petition is allowed . The respondent-Police is directed to enlarge the present petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the

alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 504 and 306 read with Section 149 of IPC registered in respondent police station Crime

No.196/2017, subject to the following conditions:

i. Each petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and shall furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting

authority.

ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.

iii. Petitioners have to make themselves available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when called for and to cooperate with the

further investigation.

iv. The petitioners have to appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute the personal bond and the

surety bond.