CASE TITTLE: HANISH ABDUL KHADAR V STATE OF KARNATAKA, SHILPA
CASE NO: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2024 (U/S 14(A) (2)
DATED ON: 21ST DAY OF MAY, 2024
QUORUM: JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
FACTS OF THE CASE:
This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 14(A)(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for setting aside the order passed by the LXX Addl. City Civil and Session Judge and Special Judge at Bengaluru (CCH-71), passed in Crl.Misc.No.2244/2024 in respect of Crime No.456/2023 registered by Hennur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 354, 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 3(1)(a), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(w)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short ‘SC & ST Act’).
The facts leading to the present appeal in question is that, that the respondent No.2 is the wife of the appellant and their marriage was solemnized on 15.07.2021. After marriage, they started residing at Shobha Arcades Apartment, Horamavu, Bangalore. As per the averments of the complaint, there were frequent quarrels between the husband and the wife. Respondent No.2 was not happy in her matrimonial home. It is further stated that, the appellant was harassing respondent No.2 in one or the other pretext and he was not taking proper care. Such being the fact, she became pregnant and, she gave birth to a child. After she gave birth to a child, she has been deserted and thrown out of the house on the ground that she belongs to scheduled caste. Being aggrieved by the cruelty and harassment meted out to her, she has lodged a complaint against the petitioner. The jurisdictional police after registering the case, conducted investigation and submitted charge sheet
LEGAL ISSUES:
Whether the bail application of the petitioner may be considered and may be enlarged on bail?
LEGAL PROVISIONS:
Section 14(A)(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
498A, 354, 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’)
Sections 3(1)(a), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(w)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
CONTENTIONS OF APPELLEANT:
The appellant through their counsel submitted that though the complainant made several allegation against the petitioner, she has compromised with the petitioner and both have decided to stay together. If bail is granted, certainly, the matter would likely to be settled.the counsel further submitted that due to some misconception of facts, the complainant lodged a complaint and moreover, the alleged offences are neither punishable with death nor imprisonment for life. Therefore, the bail of the petitioner may be considered and he may be enlarged on bail.
CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT:
The respondent through their counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submitted that the matter has been settled between them and they have agreed to live together. Therefore, the appeal may be allowed. Learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently opposes the appeal and submits that, unless respondent No.2 appeared before this Court and filed a necessary affidavit or otherwise regarding the settlement, it is not appropriate to grant bail to the appellant. therefore, the counsel further submitted that the allegations are so serious against the appellant and there may be chances of committing similar offences in the future. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled for bail.
COURTS ANALYSIS AND JUDGEMENT:
The court on Hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the charge sheet. Observed that, It appears that both husband and wife were not cordial in their matrimonial life. However, after having considered the submission of the learned counsel for the respective parties regarding the settlement arrived between the spouse, it is appropriate to grant bail in order to re-establish their matrimonial life.Hence, the court Proceeded to pass the order that, The appeal is allowed. Further The appellant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.0456/2023 of Hennur Police Station pending on the file of the LXX Addl. City Civil and Session Judge and Special Judge at Bengaluru (CCH-71), Bangalore City, on obtaining a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions: a) The appellant shall appear before the Court on all dates of hearing without fail. b) The appellant shall not tamper the evidence and threaten the prosecution witnesses. If in case, the appellant violates any of the bail conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
judgement reviewed by: Sowmya.R
