Bengaluru, September 11, 2023: The XLV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-46), granted anticipatory bail to a man accused by his wife of subjecting her to physical and mental cruelty, assault, and criminal intimidation. The order, passed by Sri. Manjunatha, allowed the petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the petitioner, Anantha Prasad S.
The Case Details
The case, registered as Crime No. 265/2023 by the Puttenahalli Police Station, Bengaluru, involves the petitioner, Anantha Prasad S., aged 53, who is the husband of the defacto complainant, Smt. Asha Raghavendra, aged 47. The charges leveled against the petitioner include offenses punishable under Sections 498A (Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), 355 (Assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour a person), and 506 (Criminal Intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The petitioner, a resident of JP Nagar, Bengaluru, sought anticipatory bail out of apprehension of arrest by the respondent police.
Allegations of the Complainant
According to the complaint, the petitioner and the complainant were married on April 17, 2022, and have a female child from the wedlock. The complainant alleged that since the marriage, the accused subjected her to physical and mental cruelty.
The specific allegations cited in the order include:
- The husband having an illicit relationship with 3-4 women, leading to harassment when the wife inquired about it.
- A demand for Rs. 1,500,000/- (15 lakh rupees) from the complainant and her father to purchase a site in Hosur. The amount was allegedly received from the father and deposited into the site owner’s account.
- The petitioner later sold the site for Rs. 4,50,000/- (4.5 lakh rupees) without informing the complainant or her father.
- The most recent incident cited was on August 25, 2023, during the Varamahalakshmi festival. When the complainant woke the petitioner, who was sleeping in the hall, he allegedly started a quarrel, assaulted her with a chappal on her eyes, cheek, chest, head, and other body parts, and subjected her to tyranny and threats.
Unable to bear the continuous physical and mental cruelty, the complainant was constrained to file a complaint with the Puttenahalli Police on August 28, 2023.
Prosecution’s Objections
The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail petition vehemently, arguing that the investigation was at an initial stage and that a prima facie case existed against the accused. The prosecution expressed concern that if released, the petitioner would again involve himself in causing mental and physical harassment to the complainant. Furthermore, they contended that the petitioner might tamper with prosecution witnesses and hamper the investigation by not cooperating with the police.
Court’s Rationale for Granting Bail
The XLV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, after hearing arguments from both sides and reviewing the records, determined that the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail.
The court noted that while the prima facie case against the petitioner under Sections 498A, 355, and 506 of the IPC was acknowledged, the gravity of the punishment was a key factor. The judge pointed out that the alleged offenses are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Crucially, the offense under Section 498A of the IPC is exclusively triable by the Magistrate, indicating that it is a less severe category of non-bailable offense.
Acknowledging that the case revolves around a matrimonial dispute, the court stated that the question of whether the petitioner committed the alleged offenses is a matter that must be decided only during a full-fledged trial.
The court emphasized the established principle of law regarding bail, holding that no purpose will be served by allowing the police to apprehend the petitioner and keep him in custody when he is ready to abide by the court’s conditions and offer due surety. Given that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Bengaluru, the court concluded that the risk of him absconding is negligible and his presence can be easily secured.
The court decided that the prosecution’s objections regarding witness tampering and non-cooperation could be adequately met by imposing stringent conditions. Consequently, the judge answered the main point of consideration in the affirmative.
Conditions of Anticipatory Bail
The court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner to be released on bail in the event of his arrest, subject to the execution of a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lakh rupees) with two sureties for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer (I.O.)/Magistrate.
The grant of bail is subject to ten specific conditions, including:
- The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the I.O. as and when required until the final report is filed.
- He shall mark his attendance twice in a month (first and third Sunday) between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. before the I.O. until the filing of the final report.
- The petitioner shall surrender before the concerned Police within 30 days from the date of the order.
- He shall not intimidate the complainant or directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
- He shall not hamper further investigation or commit similar offenses in the future.
- He shall not leave the jurisdiction of Bangalore City without the prior permission of the concerned Court.
The court finally mandated that the bail shall stand automatically canceled in the event of the violation of any of the imposed conditions. This judicial decision ensures that the accused is protected from pre-trial custody while simultaneously maintaining the flow of investigation and safeguarding the interests of the complainant and the trial process.