KABC010090272024
IN THE COURT OF XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-46)
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
PRESENT:
Sri. Manjunatha, B.A., LL.B.,
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
CRL. MISC. No.3204/2024
Petitioner
Jinu Johnson,
S/o Johnson, a/a 24 Yrs.,
r/a No.31, 12th Cross,
Krishnadevaraya Road,
Opp. SLV Defence Lavender
Apartment, Kogilu, Yelahanka,
Benglauru-560 064.
(By Sri/Smt; H. Rajappa, Adv.,)
AND
Respondent
State by Hennur P. S., Bengaluru
City.
(By the learned Public Prosecutor)
ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED U/S.438 OF Cr.P.C.,
The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed bail
petition U/s.438 of Cr.P.C., to grant anticipatory bail in favour
of the petitioner and also direct the respondent police to
release him on bail in the event of his arrest in their Crime
No.146/2024 in the interest of justice.

2
Crl.Misc.No.3204/2024
2. On the basis of the complaint filed by the
complainant-Smt.C. Shalini, a/a 33 Yrs., who is the wife of
petitioner, the case was registered against the petitioner in
Crime No.146/2024 for the offence punishable U/s.498A of
IPC. Now the petitioner being accused is apprehending his
arrest by the respondent police. Hence, the petitioner
constrained to file this petition and thereby he has prayed for
allowing the petition.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed objection in
detail by reiterating the contents of the complaint and
contended that this bail petition is not maintainable in law or on
facts of the case. Further she has reiterated the contents of
complaint and also contended that if petitioner is granted bail at
the stage of investigation, then the petitioner shall again involve
in causing mental and physical harassment to the complainant.
It is also the objection of the prosecution that the petitioner
would tamper the prosecution witness and hamper the
investigation by not co-operating the respondent police and has
prayed for dismissal of the bail petition.
4. Heard the arguments on both sides and perused the
materials on record.
5. The following points are arises for consideration of this
Court:
1. Whether the petitioner has made out sufficient
grounds for granting anticipatory bail in his favour in
Cr. No.146/2024 of Hennur P. S., at this stage as
sought for?
2. What order?

3
Crl.Misc.No.3204/2024
6. This court has answered the above points are as
under:
Point No.1: In the affirmative
Point No.2: As per final order
for the following:REASONS
7.Point No.1: On considering the papers on record, it is
evident to note that the respondent police have registered a
case in Crime No.146/2024 against the petitioner on the basis
of complaint filed by complainant-Smt.Shalini, a/a 33 Yrs., who
is the wife of petitioner for the offences punishable U/s.498A of
IPC.
It is the case of the complainant that on 30.04.2019 the
marriage of accused No.1 was solemnized with the complainant
and out of the wedlock they blessed with a female child. The
accused along with his friends under the influence of alcohol
subjected the complainant to physical and mental cruelty for
silly reasons. The accused by abusing assaulting the daughter
of complainant and also forcing the complainant to sexually cooperate with his friends.
mental
cruelty
caused
Unable to bear the physical and
by
the
accused
,
complainant
constrained to file complaint against the petitioners before
respondent police.
8. The contention of petitioner is that he is innocent of the
offences alleged against him and he has not committed any
such offence. Per-contra as submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor, the investigation is at the initial stage and it is yet to
4
Crl.Misc.No.3204/2024
be completed. Hence, it is not proper to believe or consider that
the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence.
9. It is pertinent to note that even for the sake of
argument, it is accepted that there is prima-facie case against
the petitioner for the offence punishable U/s.498A of IPC, the
said offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for
life. The offence U/s.498-A IPC is though non-bailable, it is
exclusively triable by the Magistrate.
10.It is well settled principle of law that the granting of bail
is discretionary power of the Court and every case should be
considered on the basis of facts of each case. The certified
copies of complaint and FIR produced by the petitioner
discloses that a complaint has been lodged by the complainant,
who is the wife of petitioner at Hennur P.S., in Crime
No.146/2024 on 23.03.2024 at 16.00 hours for the offence as
alleged. On perusal of the documents would disclose that there
is
a
matrimonial
dispute
between
petitioner
and
the
complainant. Against whom the filing of the complaint is
sufficient to draw apprehension in the minds of the petitioners
regarding their arrest in non-bailable offence.
11. Whether the petitioner has committed the alleged
offence as contended by the complainant is a matter, which has
to be decided only at the time of full-fledged trial.

At this
juncture, when the petitioner is ready to abide by the terms and
conditions imposed by the court and when he is ready to offer
due and adequate surety for his release on bail, then this court
is of the opinion that no purpose will be served by allowing the
respondent police to apprehend the petitioner and to keep him
5
Crl.Misc.No.3204/2024
in custody. The petitioner is the the permanent resident as
shown in the cause title and this fact has not been disputed by
the prosecution, as such the presence of petitioner can be
secured easily, hence, the question of absconding of the
petitioner does not arise at all. The objections raised by the
learned Public Prosecutor can be met by imposing stringent
conditions.

Absolutely there is no ground made out by the
prosecution to reject this bail petition. Hence, under these
circumstances, the petitioner has made out sufficient ground for
granting anticipatory bail in his favour at this stage as prayed for
as there exist reason to believe that he may be arrested in nonbailable offence. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in the
affirmative.
12. Point No.2: In view of answer of this Court on point
No.1, this court pass the following:ORDER
The bail petition filed by the Petitioner U/s.438 of
Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
The Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail
on his executing personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with
two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the
concerned I.O.,/Magistrate in the event of his arrest in
the case in Crime No.146/2024 of Hennur P. S.,
subject to following conditions:1.The Petitioner shall make himself available for
interrogation by the I.O. as and when required till the
final report is filed. Further, he shall assist the I.O. in
further investigation of the case. He shall mark his
attendance twice in a month i.e., first and third Sunday
6
Crl.Misc.No.3204/2024
of every month in between 10.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.
before the I.O., till filing of final report or further orders
whichever is earlier.
2.The Petitioner shall surrender before the
concerned Police within 15 days from the date of this
order without fail.
3.He shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the
Court or to the concerned I.O.,
4.He shall not hamper further investigation of the
case and tamper with prosecution witnesses in any
manner and shall not intimidate the complainant.
5.He shall not commit similar offences or any
offences in future,
6.He shall appear before the concerned
Magistrate Court as and when directed.
7.He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the
Bengaluru City without prior permission.
8.He shall not change his place of residence
outside the jurisdiction of Bengaluru City without prior
intimation, and
9.He shall furnish notarized copy of his
residential id address proof.
10.In the event of violation of any of the above
conditions, the above bail shall stand automatically
canceled.
(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer directly on Computer,
corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 15th day of April,
2024)
(Manjunatha)
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.

MANJUNATH
RAMA NAIK
Digitally signed by
MANJUNATH RAMA NAIK
Date: 2024.04.25 17:26:33
+0530
7
Crl.Misc.No.3204/2024
Order pronounced in the open court
vide its separate order
ORDER
The bail petition filed by the petitioner
U/s.438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
(Manjunatha )
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.