1
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
KABC010087632024
IN THE COURT OF THE LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-69)
Dated this the 20 th day of April 2024
:PRESENT:
Sri.Sabappa, B.Com., LLB (Spl.)
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3110/2024
PETITIONER :
Chethana.N,
D/o K. Narasimha Murthy,
Aged about 35 years,
R/at No.8, 4th Cross,
Papaiah Garden,
Banashankari 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru Ц 560 085.
(By Sri. Ankith S. Reddy, Adv.,)
V/s
RESPONDENT :
State by;
Rajarajeshwari Nagar Police Station,
Bengaluru.

(Represented by Public Prosecutor)
2
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
ORDER ON BAIL PETITION U/SEC.438 OF CR.P.C.
This petition is filed by the petitioner under Sec.438 of
Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in
connection with Cr.No.03/2024 registered by Rajarajeshwari
Nagar Police, Bangalore, for the offences punishable under
Secs.465, 468, 471, 420, 384, 506 r/w 34 of I.P.C.

2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner’s is that, the
respondent police have registered case against her and another
in Cr.No.03/2024 for the offences punishable under Secs.465,
468, 471, 420, 384, 506 r/w 34 of I.P.C on the basis of the
PCR lodged by one Yathish.K. It is alleged in the complaint that,
the complainant is the ex-husband of the petitioner. Their
marriage was solemnized on 16.02.2009. Due to his constant
travel abroad, the petitioner grew suspicious of his character
and there was marital discord which ultimately culminated in the
dissolution of their marriage on 13.02.2014. After the dissolution
of marriage, as a matter of goodwill, the complainant purchased
a house in the joint names of complainant and petitioner and
that petitioner would was pressuring the complainant to execute
a release deed in her favour. The complainant wanted to come
out of the harassment and he executed release deed in favour
of the petitioner on 11.01.2018 under duress. The petitioner and
her father using the Certificate of Registration of Marriage once
again approached the Family Court seeking divorce in
3
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
MC.No.4475/2018 suppressing the earlier decree of divorce in
MC.No.2426/2013. The petitioner in connivance with her father
has forced the complainant to register their marriage once again
and thereafter used the same to execute the release deed. The
petitioner used that marriage registration certificate to threaten
the complainant with a Bigamy case as he had got married to
another lady called Shanthala on 01.06.2014. Due to mounting
pressure from the petitioner, he was forced to seek divorce from
the Shanthala. The petitioner with an intention of extorting
money from the complainant has lodged false complaint and
also filed divorce petition with an intention of extorting money
from the complainant. Hence, the complaint.

Therefore, the
petitioners apprehending their arrest by the respondent police
has filed this anticipatory bail application.
3. The grounds urged by the petitioner are as under.
The petitioner submitted that, she is innocent of the alleged
offences.

The complaint was lodged through email to the
respondent police. The respondent police have mechanically
lodged the FIR. The complainant has sent similar email to
C.K.Achukattu Police Station. The C.K.Achukattu police have
also filed charge sheet against the complainant. All the
allegations leveled against the petitioner are false, perverse and
without any proof of the same. The complaint does not disclose
an iota of offence as alleged by the complainant. The
complainant very cleverly did not disclose the birth of the second
4
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
child after the alleged divorce. The complainant has left the
petitioner and minor children to fend for themselves while he is
living a life of comfort in the United Kingdom. The petitioner is
taking care of the minor children all alone and they will be
rendered homeless if the respondent police arrest the petitioner.
There are no offences forthcoming on the bare reading of the
complaint against the petitioner. She is ready and willing to
abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court. She is
ready and willing to furnish surety to the satisfaction of this
court. Hence, sought for grant of anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed objections to
the bail petition along with the report of the P.S.I, Rajarajeshwari
Nagar Police Station. In the objections the learned Public
Prosecutor has narrated the facts as stated in the F.I.R. The
investigation of the case is under progress. During the course of
investigation, the I.O has visited the spot and conducted spot
panchanama. The petitioner has created fake documents in
order to cheat the complainant. The petitioner is required for
interrogation. The petitioner is involved in the commission of the
alleged offence. If the petitioner is granted bail, there is every
chance that she may abscond and not co-operate with the
investigation and may tamper the evidence. Therefore, the P.P
has sought for rejection of bail.
5.

Heard both sides. Perused the materials on record.

6.

The points that arise for my consideration are:
5
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
1. Whether the petitioner has made out
sufficient grounds for grant of anticipatory
bail as sought for?
2. What order?
7.

My findings to the above points are as follows :
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative,
Point No.2 : As per final order,
for the following;
REASONS
8.

POINT No.1: I have gone through the bail petition and
objection statement. It is noticed that the respondent police
registered case against the petitioner in Cr.No.03/2024. The
present petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 in the FIR.
Thereby, the petitioner apprehending her arrest by the
respondent police has approached this court. On perusal of the
complaint it is noticed that the complainant has lodged the
complaint against his Ex-wife. He has made so many allegations
against the petitioner in the complaint. It goes to show that,
there is no cordial relationship between the petitioner and
complainant. Moreover, there is another case registered by the
petitioner against the complainant before Chennammanakere
Achukattu police which is registered in Cr.No.137/2019 for the
offences punishable U/Secs.498A, 420 and 417 of I.P.C. This
goes to show that, the petitioner being the wife of complainant
6
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
has filed complaint against the complainant. In order to take
revenge the complainant has filed this case against the
petitioner. The respondent police issued notice to the petitioner
and thereby, the petitioner has approached this court. The
grounds stated by the petitioner clearly reveals that, the
petitioner married the complainant in the year 2009. Later on,
there is no cordial relationship between the petitioner and
complainant. Thereby, case and counter case is filed between
them. Another case is pending. It reveals that, complainant is
also one of the accused in dowry case.
9. In over all considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and materials placed by the petitioner, one thing is clear
that the alleged offences are not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life. The alleged offences are triable by the
Magistrate Court. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the
I.O for investigation. It is further noticed that, the petitioner has
filed M.C.No.4475/2018. Earlier to that MC.No.2426/2013 was
filed for decree of divorce. This goes to show that, the petitioner
being the wife of the complainant she has filed divorce petition.
Thereby, this Court come to the conclusion that, at this stage,
the petitioner has made out sufficient grounds to enlarge her on
bail.

10. At this juncture, this Court feels that, while considering
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be
struck between two factors namely, no prejudice should be
7
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be
prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention
of the accused. In view of the above discussion, I come to the
conclusion that at this stage the petitioner has made out
sufficient grounds to enlarge her on bail. Moreover, the
prosecution contended that in case petitioner is enlarged on bail,
they may abscond, threaten the prosecution witnesses and
hamper the evidence. It is pertinent to note that, bail is a rule, jail
is exception. At this stage, based on the materials placed by the
petitioner one thing is clear that the petitioner has made out
sufficient grounds to enlarge her on bail. Thereby this court
come to conclusion that if some stringent conditions are
imposed on the petitioner and granted bail, the apprehension of
the prosecution could be safeguarded. At this juncture, on
perusal of entire records, this Court feels that the petitioner has
made out sufficient grounds to enlarge her on bail. Hence, I
answer above point No.1 in the Affirmative.
10. POINT NO.2:
In view of my findings point No.1, I
proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
Bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 438 of
Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
Petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory
bail in the event of her arrest in Cr.No.03/2024 of
8
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
Rajarajeshwari Nagar P.S., on executing her personal
bond for Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the like sum on the
following conditions.
1. The petitioner shall appear before the I.O
within 30 days from the date of this order
and co-operate for investigation.
2. The petitioner shall not tamper with the
Prosecution witnesses either directly or
indirectly in any manner.
3. She shall co-operate for investigation by the
concerned police and regularly appear
before the concerned court as and when
required.
4.

She shall not abscond from the ordinary
residence and she should furnish the
address proof to the concerned police.

5. She shall not indulge in any kind of offence.
6. She shall not leave the jurisdiction of the
court without prior permission.
7. She shall mark the attendance in the
respondent P.S between 10.00 a.m to 6.00
p.m once in a month i.e., on 2nd Sunday till
filing of the final report.

9
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
If any of the above conditions violated the
IO is at liberty to move for cancellation of
bail.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her directly on Computer,
revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this
the 20 th day of April, 2024)
(Sabappa)
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.

10
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
ORDERS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN
COURT, VIDE SEPARATE ORDER
Bail petition filed by the petitioner under
Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
Petitioner is ordered to be released on
anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in
Cr.No.03/2024 of Rajarajeshwari Nagar
P.S., on executing her personal bond for
Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the like sum on
the following conditions.

11
Crl.Misc.3110/2024
1. The petitioner shall appear before
the I.O within 30 days from the date of this
order and co-operate for investigation.
2. The petitioner shall not tamper with
the Prosecution witnesses either directly or
indirectly in any manner.
3.
She shall co-operate for
investigation by the concerned police and
regularly appear before the concerned court
as and when required.
4. She shall not abscond from the
ordinary residence and she should furnish the
address proof to the concerned police.
5. She shall not indulge in any kind of
offence.
6. She shall not leave the jurisdiction of
the court without prior permission.
7. She shall mark the attendance in the
respondent P.S between 10.00 a.m to 6.00
p.m once in a month i.e., on 2 nd Sunday till
filing of the final report.
If any of the above conditions violated
the IO is at liberty to move for cancellation of
bail.

LXVIII A.C.C & S.J,
Bengaluru City.

12
Crl.Misc.3110/2024