Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 745 (KAR)

Shekhar v. State of Karnataka

2019-03-27

H.P.SANDESH

body2019
JUDGMENT : H.P. Sandesh, J. I have heard the arguments of the petitioner s counsel and also the learned HCGP for respondent-State. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that the deceased marriage was solmanized with this petitioner four years ago and she was subjected to dowry harassment and also an allegation that this petitioner was doubting the fidelity of the deceased and the same was informed to the complainant on 9/10/2018 i.e. one day prior to the committing of the suicide. She came to know through the relatives that the deceased committed suicide and immediately, he rushed to the hospital along with his wife and found the dead body and hence, immediately he lodged the complaint against this petitioner and also parent-in-law. Based on the complaint, police have registered a case for the offence punishable under Section 498-A, 304B r/w 34 of IPC. Now, the charge sheet is also filed after the investigation deleting the parent-in-laws in the charge sheet and only arrayed accused No.1, i.e. the husband as sole accused. 3. The main contention of this petitioner in this petition that he has been falsely implicated in the case and petitioner being implicated at the instance of the persons who are having ill will against the petitioner. The petitioner is a coolie by profession and if he is not released on bail, his parents will be put to great hardships and loss. Now, the investigation has been completed. There is no need to continue the petitioner in the custody and hence, he may be enlarged on bail and he is willing to undertake that he will not tamper the prosecution witnesses. 4. Counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterates the same in his arguments contends that during the course of investigation clarified with regard to the timings mentioned in the complaint and further statement of witnesses was also recorded. There is no any material to continue the petitioner in the custody. 5. 4. Counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterates the same in his arguments contends that during the course of investigation clarified with regard to the timings mentioned in the complaint and further statement of witnesses was also recorded. There is no any material to continue the petitioner in the custody. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State in his arguments contends that the marriage was solemnized four years ago and the death is within the seven years and that too happened in the house of matrimonial home and there are sufficient materials and the witnesses who have been examined during the course of investigation are the neighbourers have also stated in their statements that on the date of the incident, quarrel was taken place between this petitioner and the victim and hence, there are no grounds to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner. 6. After having heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State, the point that arise for my consideration is whether this Court can exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 7. Having considered the arguments of the petitioner s counsel and also the HCGP, this Court has to consider the materials on record and on perusal of the complaint, it is alleged that she was subjected to dowry harassment and the jewels which was given at the time of marriage was also sold by this petitioner and suspected the fidelity of the deceased. The victim used to inform the same to the complainant and he advised and consoled her. However, two days prior to incident she called and spoke to the complainant. The victim took the decision to commit suicide when she was unable to tolerate the humiliation. 8. Based on the complaint registered, investigated the matter and on perusal of the charge sheet and the statement of witnesses, neighbouring witnesses have made a statement that at around 11.00 a.m. they heard the galata sound in the house of this petitioner and after that, this petitioner left the house and when he came back to the house, found the dead body that she has committed suicide. 9. 9. On perusal of the FSL report, analysis have responded for the presence of Carbamate insecticide article Nos.1, 2 and 3 and also not found any external injuries and having taken note of the cause of death and also materials found on record, there is a proximity with regard to the date of committing suicide and also the statement of witnesses. In the statements they have stated that on the date of incident, a quarrel was taken place in the house of the deceased and having considered the same, it is not a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 10. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following: ORDER The criminal petition is rejected.