Judgment : The petition is filed under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, praying for an Order of anticipatory bail, apprehending arrest for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 498-A, 302, 304-B read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this petition are as under: The deceased-Sowmya is the wife of the petitioner and their marriage was performed on 25.06.2007 in Srirama Kalyana Mandira, Mysore. At the time of the marriage, in the presence of the elders, 100 gms. of gold ornaments and an amount of Rs.1,00,000.00 and an amount of Rs.50,000.00 to purchase a motor cycle were given to the petitioner. After the marriage, they have a male child and after the birth of the child the petitioner started insisting his wife to bring money and gold from her parental home and subjecting her to cruelty and harassment. It is because of this reason that the complainant used to pay Rs. 10,000.00, Rs. 15,000.00 now and then and totally had paid an amount of Rs. 50,000.00. Despite the payment on the day earlier to the incident i.e., on 31.08.2008 and on the insistment of the petitioner a gold chain weighing 15 gms. was given to the child and the deceased and the child were sent through Naveen, the brother of the deceased to the petitioner’s home. At the time when the deceased, the child and Naveen reached the petitioner’s house, it is alleged that the parents of the petitioner and others abused the deceased having stayed in her parental home for a long time and the brother of the deceased asked the deceased to go into the house. It is stated that even the other members of the family apart from the petitioner were insisted the deceased to bring money and gold ornaments from the parental home. On 1.9.2009 at about 3.00 to 4.00 p.m., when Mahesha came and informed about the death of the deceased-Sowmya by hanging, the complainant was scared hearing the incident and went to the house of his son-in-law and saw the dead body found hanging and none of the family members were in the house. On 1.9.2009 at about 3.00 to 4.00 p.m., when Mahesha came and informed about the death of the deceased-Sowmya by hanging, the complainant was scared hearing the incident and went to the house of his son-in-law and saw the dead body found hanging and none of the family members were in the house. In the circumstances, he felt that all the members of the family were responsible for the death of the deceased and as earlier the deceased was threatened danger to her life, submitted a complaint to the police on these facts which came to be registered for the above said offences. The post-mortem of the body of the deceased was held and it reveals that the death was due to asphyxia as a result of hanging. 3. The petitioner submits that he is innocent and he has not committed any crime. There was no cruelty or harassment to the deceased and he is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court for release on bail. It is also his submission that as many as 120 persons of the village of the complainant had came and destroyed their house by throwing stones. It is in these circumstances, that the petitioner and other members of the family were not in the house. So, it is his submission that the petitioner was not at all responsible for the offence registered much less the offence under Section 306 of the IPC. It is also submitted that the other accused have been granted bail. 4. The learned Government Pleader submits that there is prima facie material against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC and also for the offence under Section 498-A of the IPC. He submits that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment and in consequence of the cruelty, the deceased was compelled to commit suicide. On these grounds, he has sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. 6. The point that arisesfor my consideration is; “Whether the petitioner is entitled to the anticipatory bail sought for?” 7. As could be seen from the allegations made in the complaint, it is the father of the deceased who has submitted his complaint immediately after the incident. 6. The point that arisesfor my consideration is; “Whether the petitioner is entitled to the anticipatory bail sought for?” 7. As could be seen from the allegations made in the complaint, it is the father of the deceased who has submitted his complaint immediately after the incident. He states in the complaint that the marriage of the couple was performed on 25.06.2007 and at the time of the marriage, he had paid the petitioner gold ornaments weighing about 100 gms., an amount of Rs. 1,00,000.00 and also an amount of Rs. 50,000.00 for the purpose of purchasing a motorcycle. He also states that after the birth of the child there was harassment to the deceased by the petitioner insisting her to bring money and on different occasions he had paid an amount of Rs. 50,000.00. So also he states that the petitioner was not satisfied with the amount, which was paid and insisted to bring gold chain for the child. 8. The complainant had also gave gold chain weighing about 15 gms. and had sent the deceased with the child through the brother of the deceased to the house of the petitioner. It is at that time quarrel ensued and the parent’s-in-law abused the deceased’s parents and other members of the family putting forth the delay for return and she was abused in filthy language. So, it is in the context of these circumstances that the deceased committed suicide. 9. Now as could be seen from the copy of the post-mortem report, it has been proved that there are as many as 5 injuries apart from the ligature mark over the neck. They are as follows. - (1) A linear abrasion of about 5.6 cm. x 1 mm. x 1 mm. Present on left submandibular region. (2) Cresentic scratch mark 4 in No. 1 mm. x 2 mm. Present on superior aspect of left shoulder. (3) 3 vertical linear abrasions each measuring about 3.4 c.m. x 1 present over upper part of left axilla. (4) 2 vertical linear abrasions each measuring about 3.4 cm. x present over upper part of right axilla. So, the presence of the injuries on the body of the deceased apart from the ligature mark would prima facie indicate that prior to the death, the deceased had suffered injuries. (4) 2 vertical linear abrasions each measuring about 3.4 cm. x present over upper part of right axilla. So, the presence of the injuries on the body of the deceased apart from the ligature mark would prima facie indicate that prior to the death, the deceased had suffered injuries. So, taking into consideration the material placed on record, a case has been made out at least for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the IPC. 10. Though the other accused have been granted bail, I do not think that itself is a ground to grant anticipatory bail for the petitioner, who is the husband of the deceased and the person who has to protect the interest of his wife. The allegations made in the complaint are directed against the petitioner with regard to payment of money and also gold ornaments. It appears that because of subjecting the deceased to cruelty and harassment, she might have committed suicide on the date of the incident. 11. When there is prima facie material, the provisions of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked. The section provides a discretion to the Court for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest particularly to protect the interest of the innocent and those who have been falsely implicated in the crime. The perusal of the material placed on record prima facie does not reveal the innocence of the petitioner or his false implication. 12. So taking into consideration all these circumstances and the prima facie material available for the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC. I do not think that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. I answer the point in negative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is dismissed.