Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1053 (KAR)

K. P. Manjunath Kumar v. State of Karnataka

2011-11-02

H.BILLAPPA

body2011
ORDER H. Billappa, J. The Petitioner has filed this, petition under Section 438, of Cr, P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail 2. It is stated in the petition, the petitioner is innocent o£1he offences alleged against him and .he has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner is permanent resident of Bangalore and he is ready to abide all the conditions that may be imposed; Therefore the petitioner has prayed, for grant of Anticipatory Bail. 3. It is alleged the complainant married the petitioner on 14-2-2002. The marriage was performed by spending huge amount of 4 lakhs and 50 grams gold and motor bike were given. The petitioner, his mother and sisters ill-treated the complainant demanding dowry. During September 2010, the complainant left the marital home went to her parents house. A case in Crime No. 218/11 of Kodigehalli Police Station. Bangalore, has been registered for the offences punishable under Sees. 498-A, 506 of PC, and Sees. 3 and 4 of D.P. Act. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He also submitted that the petitioner has sent legal notice dated 30-8-2011 calling upon the complainant to join him and complainant has responded saying that she is willing to join the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail. 5. As against this, the learned Government pleader submitted that the investigation is 'going on and the petitioner is required for investigation as allegations of ill-treatment have been made and therefore, the petitioner cannot be granted anticipatory bail. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties. 7. The point that arises for my consideration is; Whether the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail? 8. It is relevant to note, the allegations that the complainant married the petitioner on 14-2-2002. The marriage was performed by spending huge amount of 4/-lakhs and 50 grams of gold and motor bike were given. The petitioner, his mother and sisters ill-treated the complainant demanding dowry. The petitioner has sent legal notice dated 30-8-2011 calling upon the complainant to join him. The complainant has responded saying that she is willing to join the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions. 9. The petitioner, his mother and sisters ill-treated the complainant demanding dowry. The petitioner has sent legal notice dated 30-8-2011 calling upon the complainant to join him. The complainant has responded saying that she is willing to join the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions. 9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail subject to the following conditions. i) In the ever it of his arrest in Cr.No.2 18/11 of Kodigehalli Police Station, Bangalore, the petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. ii) The petitioner shall appear before the I.O. with in five days from today and shall co-operate with the I.O. for investigation as and when required. iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the witnesses. iv) If the petitioner violate any condition, the respondent-State can move for cancellation of the Bail.