KABC010016852023
IN THE COURT OF XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-46)
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
PRESENT:
Sri. Manjunatha, B.A., LL.B.,
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
CRL.MISC. No.534/2023
Petitioners
1.Arunkumar.K
S/o Krishnamurthy.R, a/a 31 Yrs.,
2.Smt. Ammu
W/o Krishnamurthy.R
Both are r/a No.37, Lakshmi
Illam,
Lakshmi Layout, 6th Cross,
Vittsandr, Begur Main Road and
Post,
Bengaluru-560 068.
(By Sri/Smt; H.E. Basavaraj,
Advocate)
AND
Respondents
State by Begur P.S.,
(By the learned Public
Prosecutor)
ORDER ON BAIL PETITION FILED U/S.438 OF Cr.P.C.,
The learned counsel for the Petitioners has filed bail
petition U/s.438 of Cr.P.C., to grant anticipatory bail in favour of
the Petitioners and also direct the Respondent Police to
2
Crl.Misc.No.534/2023
release them on bail in the event of their arrest in their Crime
No.9/2023 in the interest of justice.
2. The brief facts of the bail petition is that on the basis of
the information of Smt.Agees Marina W/o first petitioner, the
Respondent Police have registered a case in Crime No.9/2023
against the Petitioners for an offences punishable U/s.498A
and 420 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP Act. The Petitioners
being accused persons apprehending their arrest at the hands
of respondent police and constrained to file this petition to grant
bail.
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 since the investigation of the case is in
progress. Further, she has reiterated the contents of Complaint
and also contended that if Petitioners is granted bail then they
again will involve in causing mental and physical harassment to
the Complainant and also chance of destroying the evidence,
tamper the prosecution witnesses and hamper the investigation.
Accordingly, prayed for dismissal of the bail petition.
4. Heard the arguments. Perused the relevant materials on
record.
5. The following points are arises for consideration of this
Court:
1. Whether the Petitioners have made out
sufficient grounds for granting Anticipatory bail
in their favour in Cr. No.9/2023 of Begur P.S., at
this stage as sought for?
2. What order?

3
Crl.Misc.No.534/2023
6. This court has answered the above points are as
under:
Point No. 1
Point No. 2
:
:
In the Affirmative
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
Crime No.9/2023 against the Petitioners for the offences
punishable U/s.498A and 420 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP Act
on the Complaint of Smt.Agees Marina, who is the W/o first
petitioner.

Admittedly the petitioner No.1 is the husband and
petitioner No.2 is the mother-in-law of the alleged complainantSmt.Agees Marina, which is not in dispute.
8.It is the case of the complainant that on 27.1.2021 the
marriage
of
complainant.

accused
No.1
was
solemnized
with
the
After the marriage the complainant started to
reside along with family members of accused No.1, the accused
No.1 subjected her to physical and mental cruelty by not having
any physical relationship since from the marriage as accused
No.1 had illicit relationship with another lady at his working
place, when she enquire, every day the accused used to harass
her, and she brought to the notice of accused No.2, without
hearing the words of complainant, demanded her to bring
additional dowry in terms of bike and gold articles from her
parents, when she failed to bring the same both the accused
subjected her to physical and mental cruelty for silli reasons,
and the accused No.1 prior to the marriage having illicit
relationship with another lady, without disclosing the same by
4
Crl.Misc.No.534/2023
cheating married the complainant. Unable to bear the physical
and mental cruelty caused by the accused, complainant
constrained to file complaint against the petitioners before
respondent police.
9.The contention of petitioners is that they are innocent of
the offences alleged and there is absolutely no case made out
against them for the alleged offences. But, as pointed out by the
learned Public Prosecutor, investigation is not yet completed, at
this stage if the bail is granted in favour of the petitioners, then
they may abscond and also tamper the prosecution witnesses
and hamper the investigation, and this stage when investigation
is under process, this Court cannot come to the conclusion that
the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against
them. Hence, at this stage the contention of petitioners that they
are innocent of the offences alleged against them does not
stand for consideration. It is not desirable on the part of this
Court at this stage to come to the conclusion that the petitioners
are innocent of the offences alleged against them.
10. It is pertinent to note that even for the sake of
argument, it is accepted that there is prima-facie case against
the Petitioners for the offences punishable U/s.498A and 420 of
IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP Act, and the said offences are not
punishable with death or imprisonment for life. But the offence
U/s.498A and 420 of IPC are though non-bailable, it is
exclusively triable by the Magistrate.
11.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
5
Crl.Misc.No.534/2023
copies complaint and FIR produced by the petitioners discloses
that a complaint has been lodged by the complainantSmt.Agees marina, who is the wife of first petitioner, and
daughter-in-law of petitioner No.2 at Begur P.S., in Crime
No.9/2023 on 11.01.2023 at 11.00 hours for an offences
punishable U/s.498A and 420 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP
Act. The petitioners have also produced the certified copy of
the order passed in Crl., Misc., No.1069/2022 dated 2.2.2022,
wherein the petitioners have granted anticipatory bail for the
limited period, and the same has been expired. The documents
would disclose that there is a matrimonial dispute between first
petitioner and the complainant. Admittedly, the petitioner No.1 is
the husband and petitioner No.2 is the mother-in-law of the
alleged complainant-Smt.Agees Marina, 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.
12.Whether the petitioners have committed the alleged
offences 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 petitioners are ready to abide by the terms
and conditions imposed by the court and when they are ready
to offer due and adequate surety for their release on bail, then
this court is of the opinion that no purpose will be served by
allowing the respondent police to apprehend the petitioners and
to keep them in custody. The petitioners are the permanent
residents as shown in the cause title and this fact has not been
disputed by the prosecution, as such the presence of petitioners
can be secured easily, hence, the question of absconding of the
6
Crl.Misc.No.534/2023
petitioners does not arise at all. The objections raised by the
learned Public Prosecutor can be met by imposing stringent
conditions. Absolutely there is no grounds made out by the
prosecution to reject this bail petition. Hence, under these
circumstances, the petitioners have made out sufficient ground
for granting anticipatory bail in their favour at this stage as
prayed for as there exist reason to believe that they may be
arrested in non-bailable offences. Accordingly, I answer Point
No.1 in the affirmative.
13. 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 petitioners U/s.438 of
Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail
on their executing personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/each with one solvent surety for the surety for like
sum
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
concerned
I.O.,/Magistrate in the event of their arrest in the case
in Crime No.9/2023 of Begur P.S., subject to following
conditions:1.The Petitioners shall make themselves available for
interrogation by the I.O. as and when required till
the final report is filed. Further, they shall assist
the I.O. in further investigation of the case.
Further the Petitioner No.1 shall give his
attendance before the concerned I.O., on first
Sunday of every month in between 10.00 a.m.

7
Crl.Misc.No.534/2023
and 2.00 p.m. till filing of final report or further
orders whichever is earlier.
2.The
Petitioners
shall
surrender
before
the
concerned Police within 30 days from the date of
this order without fail.
3.They 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.They shall not hamper further investigation of the
case and tamper with prosecution witnesses in
any
manner
and
shall
not
intimidate
the
complainant.
5.They shall not commit similar offences or any
offences during the pendency of case,
6.They shall appear before the concerned Magistrate
Court as and when directed.
7.They shall not leave the jurisdiction of Bangalore
City without the prior permission,
8.They shall not change their place of residence
outside the jurisdiction of Bangalore City without
prior intimation, and
9.They shall furnish the notarized copies of their
residential id address proof.
(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer directly on Computer, corrected by me
and then pronounced in open Court on this the 23rd day of January, 2023)
(Manjunatha)
XLV Addl. CC & SJ, Bengaluru.

8
Crl.Misc.No.534/2023
Order pronounced in the open court
vide its separate order
ORDER
The bail petition filed by the petitioners
U/s.438 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
(Manjunatha)
XLV Addl. CC & sJ, Bengaluru.

9
Crl.Misc.No.534/2023