IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.P. Sandesh, J.
Asif Khan - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 6036/2022
Decided On : 21-07-2022
Bail - Offences under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act - The court granted bail to the accused, considering the gravity of the offence, nature of injuries, and the pending dispute, subject to certain conditions to protect the interest of the prosecution.
Fact of the Case:
The victim, who had been married for ten years and had two children, alleged mental and physical harassment by her husband and mother-in-law. The complaint detailed an attempt to commit murder and assault, leading to the filing of charges under various sections of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the injuries were simple in nature and that the marriage had taken place ten years ago, with a pending dispute before the court. Considering these factors, the court granted bail to the accused, subject to specific conditions.
Issues: The issues revolved around the allegations of mental and physical harassment, attempt to commit murder, and assault, leading to charges under various sections of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the gravity of the offence, the nature of injuries, and the pending dispute as key factors in granting bail to the accused.
Final Decision: The petition for bail was allowed, and the accused were granted bail subject to specific conditions to protect the interest of the prosecution.
JUDGMENT
1. This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioners/accused on bail, in the event of their arrest in respect of Crime No. 25/2022 registered by Hassan Women Police Station, Hassan, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 307, 114 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the marriage of the victim was performed with the accused No. 1 ten years ago and in the said wedlock, she gave birth to two children. It is alleged in the complaint that she was subjected to both mental and physical harassment and all of them joined together and disconnected electricity and caused inconvenience to the victim. That on 18.04.2022, her husband and also mother-in-law suddenly trespassed the house and both of them holding her hands and also neck made an attempt to commit murder and assaulted and kicked her on chest and also abdomen. When she escaped from the said blow, the husband brought the chopper from the kitchen and tried to assault and inflict injury on the left hand and when she escaped from the said blow and came out from the house, both of them ran away from the place in two wheeler and panchayath was held and case was also filed in Crl.Misc.No. 255/2021 claiming maintenance and instead of providing maintenance, subjected her for both mental and physical harassment and hence, invoked the offence under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 307, 114 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that mother-in-law had filed the complaint against the complainant on 02.06.2022 when she made attempt to trespass the house. The counsel also would submit that legal notice was issued on 20.05.2022 and original suit was also filed which is numbered as 11/2021 and after thought, the present complaint is filed on 17.05.2022 and roped all the family members, including the daughters and their respective husbands. Hence, the petitioners are entitled for bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State would submit that specific overt act allegation is made against accused Nos. 1 and 2 that they assaulted the complainant. In support of his argument, he also relied upon the wound certificate which discloses three injuries which are simple in nature. He also would submit that an attempt is made to take away the life which chopper and the injured has escaped from the said blow. Hence, there is a prima facie against the petitioners herein.
6. Having heard the respective counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, accused Nos. 1 to 6 are the family members including the son-in-laws' and accused Nos. 1 and 2 are the husband and mother-in-law and no doubt, in the complaint, specific overt act allegation is made against the husband and mother-in-law and injuries are also simple in nature and those injuries are only tenderness. Hence, taking note of the accusation made in the complaint, gravity of the offence, nature of injuries and also the fact that the marriage has taken place ten years ago and having two kids and the dispute is also pending before the Court, since the complainant also filed criminal miscellaneous petition claiming maintenance and original suit is also filed by the respondent, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioners, subject to imposing certain conditions to protect and safeguard the interest of the prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:-
ORDER
The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners shall be released on bail, in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 25/2022 registered by Hassan Women Police Station, Hassan, for th
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the gravity of the offence, the nature of injuries, and the pending dispute, highlighting the importance of considering these factors in bail deci....
The court considered the severity of the offences, the delay in lodging the complaint, and the nature of the allegations in granting bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the timing of the complaint, the nature of the allegations, and the need for further investigation are crucial factors in determining the gran....
The court's decision was influenced by the gravity of the offence and the fact that the offences were not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
Bail is a rule and rejection is an exception, and the specific circumstances of the case must be considered when granting or rejecting bail in non-bailable offences.
The court considered the specific allegation and medical opinion in determining the appropriateness of granting bail to the petitioner.
The court's decision was influenced by the specific allegations made against the first petitioner/a1, the lack of specific allegations against the other petitioners/a-2 to a-4, and the direction for ....
Entitlement to anticipatory bail based on specific allegations of harassment and illegal demands.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.