Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 357 (KAR)

Santhosh v. State Of Karnataka

2020-02-06

SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 27.12.2019 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Koppal (for short trial Court) in Crl.Misc.No.803/2019 which had been filed seeking for bail by the petitioner and certain others who are accused in Kushtagi Police Station Crime NO.226/2019 in FIR No.261/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 109, 354(A), 354(D)(2), 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant by name Kumari Sudha had filed a complaint stating that her second brothers daughter by name Jyothi was married to Kanakapur Tanda and when she went to attend the said marriage, at that time, her brother-in-law by name Santosh i.e. the petitioner herein came in acquaintance with the complainant. Thereafter on several occasions, the petitioner-accused No.1 is said to have pressurized the complainant to marry him in spite of the complainant having told him that she was not interested and she has engaged to some one else, the complainant further alleges that the petitioner threatened her life if she did not agree to marry the petitioner/accused No.1. On the basis of the said allegations the above complaint was filed for the above offences has filed against the petitioner/accused No.1 and certain others. 3. The petitioner and other accused had approached the trial Court, the trial Court though allowed the bail applications in respect of other accused rejected the bail petition of the petitioner/accused No.1 on the ground that there were overt acts which had been alleged against the petitioner-accused No.1 was subjecting the complainant to sexual harassment. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. He contends that the allegations made in the complaint do not make out a case which would be punishable with imprisonment for life. He submits that a false complaint is filed on account of certain family issues which have arisen. Admittedly, the complainant and the accused family are known to each other. The accused is a permanent resident of Kanakapur Tanda having landed property. Hence, he submits that the accused may be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.226/2019. 5. Admittedly, the complainant and the accused family are known to each other. The accused is a permanent resident of Kanakapur Tanda having landed property. Hence, he submits that the accused may be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.226/2019. 5. This Court having gone through the complaint, the order of the trial Court, FIR is of the considered opinion that the complaint filed does not make out a case which would require punishment for imprisonment of life or death. The offences as alleged are required to be proved during the course of trial. 6. Accordingly, the following: ORDER The anticipatory bail petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.226/2019 in Crl.Misc.No.803/2019 pending on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Koppal on the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall appear and surrender before Principal District and Sessions Judge, Koppal within ten days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and shall furnish a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the said court. ii. The petitioner shall appear before the trial court regularly on the appointed dates; iii. The petitioner shall furnish list of movable and immovable property held by him to the said Court. iv. The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or cause any threat to any of the prosecution witness/s in any manner. v. The petitioner shall furnish a list of immovable properties owned by him to the police station.