2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 39537
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 959 OF 2024 BETWEEN:
GANGAPPA .N, S/O NANJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 1137/44, PRAJWALA SHREE NILAYA, 12TH CROSS, 3RD MAIN ROAD, M C LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANDEEP HEGDE, ADVOCATE, SMT. NAGALAKSHMI .S, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY BASAVESHWARANAGAR POLICE STATION, Digitally REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, signed by SOWMYA D
2. SMT. VIJAYLAKSHMI, Location: W/O GANGAPPA, High Court AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, of Karnataka NO 06, 10TH MAIN, SHIVANAGAR, WEST OF CORD ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.472/2023 REGISTERED BY BASAVESHWARA NAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 506, 498A, 504, 420, 294, 323 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF V ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition under Section
438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Basaveshwara Nagar Police Station, in Cr.No.472/2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 498A, 504, 420, 294 & 323 of IPC.
2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are that the complainant is working as a conductor in BMTC, Chandra Layout Depot and she was married in 1999 with one Chandrashekar and she was having a son by name Naveen C.P. aged about 20 years. Subsequently, the marriage between herself and Chandrashekar was dissolved by decree of divorce and subsequently, she came in contact with the petitioner through Kannada Matrimony App and later on, on 03.10.2019, they got married in Hanumantha Temple, Gandhinagar and marriage was also registered. Subsequently, petitioner shifted his residence to the house of the complainant and petitioner thereafter, under the guise that he lost his job because of Corona, started demanding the amount and received Rs.8,50,000/- from the complainant under the guise of purchasing a car in order to run it as a taxi. Subsequently, he has also subjected her to ill-treatment and availed Rs.4,00,000/- under the guise of going to Dubai for earning money and later on, he immediately returned but did not return the amount. He used to subject her to ill-treatment and regularly demand the amount and certain rent of tenancy premises were directly made to transfer to his account. It is alleged that on 30.11.2021, the first wife of petitioner by name Sharada and daughter Vinutha, approached the complainant, alleging that she is the first wife and the petitioner had married her first and she had two children and later on, he cheated number of ladies like complainant and he had married number of ladies and number of cases were registered against him. It is also alleged that when complainant demanded to transfer the car and two- wheeler in her name, which was purchased out of her funds, he demanded Rs.10,00,000/-. It is further alleged that he has also uploaded her mobile number in matrimony app. As a result, some unconnected persons used to call her and behave adamantly by using vulgar language. He further asserted that he has uploaded the photographs of number of persons and also threatened that if she does not meet his demand, he will also upload her photographs and he has also physically assaulted her. Hence, she lodged a complaint in this regard and on the basis of complaint, the crime came to be registered.
3. The petitioner apprehending his arrest, has approached the learned Sessions Judge seeking anticipatory bail. But the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the bail petition. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP. Perused the records.
5. The allegations of the prosecution disclose that the complainant came in contact with the present petitioner through Kannada Matrimony App and subsequently, they married in a temple and marriage was registered. It is also alleged that he extracted certain amount from her and physically & mentally harassed her. The other allegations also disclose that his first wife has also approached the complainant and cautioned her, asserting that he had cheated number of ladies by marrying with them and exploiting them. All these facts clearly disclose that the petitioner is in the habit of cheating the persons through Kannada matrimony and used to marry them and thereby extracting the amount from them. Certain transactions in the present case disclose that they were through bank transactions. Certain payments were alleged to be by way of cash. There are other serious allegations regarding the petitioner cheating number of ladies and marrying them and considering his modus operandi and considering the serious allegations, this is not a fit case wherein the discretion can be exercised in favour of the present petitioner. Even the petitioner has not spare