IN THE COURT OF LXXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-72)
DATED THIS THE 1 st DAY OF JULY, 2022
PRESENT:
Smt. K.S.JYOTHISHREE, B.Com, L.L.B.
LXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
CRL.MISC.No.6059/2022
Petitioners
1. Madan Mohan,
Aged about 29 years,
S/o Venkateshwarlu,
2. Smt. Padma.K,
W/o Venkateshwarlu,
Aged about 49 years
3. Bhagyalakshmi,
Aged about 31 years,
W/o Venkateshwarlu,
All are R/at No.7-105,
Settipalli, BTB Colony,
7th Line, Mangalam,
Tirupathi,
Andhra Pradesh.
(By Sri.Madhu.R, Adv.)

AND
Respondent State of Karnataka
Girinagar P S,
Bangalore.
(By the learned Public
Prosecutor)
2
Crl.Misc.No.6059/2022
ORDER ON BAIL APPLICATION FILED U/S.438
OF Cr.P.C.
This bail application is filed by the petitioners
under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to grant an order
of anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in
Crime No.157/2022 for the offence punishable U/s.
498A, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.3 & 4 of D.P.Act.
2. The facts are as under:
The complainant is the legally wedded wife of
petitioner No.1 and their marriage was performed on
14.02.2019. At the time of marriage, the petitioners
received
various
gold
ornaments
as
a
dowry.

Thereafter, the petitioners with common intention,
started
quarreling
with
complainant,
abused,
demanded more dowry and treated her with cruelty.
Inspite of several panchayath, the petitioners were
failed to change their attitude. They threatened the
complainant with dire consequences.
3. Grounds for bail:
3
Crl.Misc.No.6059/2022
1. The petitioners are innocents.
2. They tortured the complainant, received
and demanded dowry.
3.
The
complainant
herself
left
the
matrimonial home on 28.02.2021. After the
lapse of 1 year 4 months, the present
complaint is filed.
4. Even today, the petitioner No.1 is ready to
take care the complainant, but she is not
ready to come back.
5. The petitioners are ready to abide by
conditions to be imposed by the court.

the
With these contentions, they have requested to
allow the application.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed the
objections and re-iterated the complaint averments.
There are prima facie materials against the petitioners
to reject the bail. If the bail application is allowed, the
petitioners may put threat to the complainant and her
parents.

Hence,
prayed
for
dismissal
of
the
application.
6. Heard. The counsel for petitioners filed copy of
Police Notice dated, 03.06.2022.

4
Crl.Misc.No.6059/2022
7. Now the points that arise for my consideration
are:
1. Whether the petitioners have made
out sufficient grounds to grant
anticipatory bail ?
2. What order?
8.

My
findings
on
the
above
points
are
hereunder:
Point No.1:
Point No.2:
In the affirmative
As per final order,
for the following:
R EAS O N S
9. Point No.1: The petitioner No.1 is husband,
petitioner No.2 and 3 are mother and sister of
petitioner No.1. It appears that the relationship
between the complainant and petitioner No.1 is not
good.
10. It is the contention of the complainant that
after marriage, the petitioners started to harass her
both physically and mentally. She has alleged that
they demanded more dowry.

5
Crl.Misc.No.6059/2022
11. It appears that I.O. has commenced the
investigation,
conducted
mahazar,
recorded
the
statement of witnesses and completed the major part
of the investigation. The involvement of petitioners is
yet to be proved. The alleged offences are not
punishable with death or imprisonment for life. They
are to be tried before learned Magistrate. Hence, there
is absolutely no reason to deny benefit of anticipatory
bail to the petitioners at this stage. Consequently, the
point No.1 is answered in the affirmative.
12. Point No.2: From the discussion made
herein above, it is clear that this petition deserves to
be allowed. In the result, therefore, I proceed to pass
the following:
ORD ER
This bail application filed by the
petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is
hereby allowed.
The respondent police is hereby
directed to release the petitioners in the
event
of
their
arrest
in
Crime
6
Crl.Misc.No.6059/2022
No.157/2022 for the offence punishable
U/s. 498A, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.3
& 4 of D.P.Act, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The petitioners shall execute
personal bond for Rs.50,000/each with like sum surety.
2. The petitioners shall not threaten
the
complainant
and
other
witnesses.
(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer directly on the computer,
corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 1st day of
July, 2022)
(K.S.JYOTHISHREE)
LXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge
Bengaluru.