IN THE COURT OF LXXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-72)
DATED THIS THE 24 th DAY OF JUNE, 2022
PRESENT:
Smt. K.S.JYOTHISHREE, B.Com, L.L.B.
LXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
CRL.MISC.No.5936/2022
Petitioners
1. Ravi Kumar.V,
S/o M.Venu,
Aged about 31 years.
2. M Venu,
S/o M Mallaiah,
Aged about 55 years.
3.Rathna @
Munirathnamma,
W/o M.Venu,
Aged about 50 years.
4.Manjula @ V. Manju,
D/o M.Venu,
Aged about 29 years.
All are R/at No.205, 3rd
Cross, 4th Main, Siddarth
Nagar, Madiwala,
Bengaluru-560068.
(By Sri. K.B.Manjunatha,
Adv.)

AND
2
Crl.Misc.No.5936/2022
Respondent State of Karnataka
Madivala P S, Bangalore.
(By the learned Public
Prosecutor)
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.94/2022 for the offence punishable U/s.
498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.3 & 4 of
DP Act.
2. The facts are as under:
The complainant is the legally wedded wife of
petitioner No.1 and their marriage was performed on
15.08.2021. At the time of marriage, the petitioners
received cash of Rs.3,00,000/-, gold and household
articles as dowry. After marriage, the petitioners with
common
intention
started
quarrel
with
the
complainant, demanded more dowry, abused in filthy
3
Crl.Misc.No.5936/2022
language, assaulted with hands and on 09.06.2022,
the petitioners thrown her out from the house with
dire consequences.
3. Grounds for bail:
1. The petitioners are innocents.
2. There was no demands for dowry. The
complainant was not interested to reside with
petitioner No.2 and 3.
3. She voluntarily left the house of the
petitioners No.1 to 3.
4. At no point of time, the petitioner No.4 had
been to the house of the complainant.
5. The petitioners are ready to abide by the
conditions to be imposed by the court.
With these contentions, they have requested to
allow the application.
4. 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,
application.

prayed
for
dismissal
of
the
4
Crl.Misc.No.5936/2022
5. Heard.
6. 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?
7.

My
findings
on
the
above
points
are
hereunder:
Point No.1:
Point No.2:
In the Negative
As per final order,
for the following:
R EAS O N S
8. Point No.1: It appears that the relationship
between the complainant and petitioner No.1 is not
good. The petitioner No. 2 and 3 are the parents and
petitioner No.4 is sister of petitioner No.1.
9. It is the case of the complainant that the
petitioners with common intention treated her with
cruelty and demanded more dowry. She has alleged
that at the time of marriage, the petitioners received
5
Crl.Misc.No.5936/2022
cash, gold and utensils as dowry. All these facts are to
be proved at the time of trial.
10. 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.
11. 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:
6
Crl.Misc.No.5936/2022
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 Cr.No.94/2022 for the offence
punishable U/s. 498A, 323, 504, 506 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 24th day
of June, 2022)
(K.S.JYOTHISHREE)
LXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge
Bengaluru.