Bengaluru, September 7, 2023: The XLV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-46), has granted anticipatory bail to a husband and his two relatives in a case involving alleged dowry harassment and cruelty. The order, passed by Judge Sri. Manjunatha, allows Darshan Singh, his mother Smt. Meera Singh Rajput, and his brother Dheeraj Singh, to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 198/2023 of Kothanur Police Station.
The petitioners were booked for offences punishable under Sections 498A (Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), 323 (Voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), and 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) read with Section 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Allegations of Cruelty and Assault
The case was registered based on a complaint filed by Smt. Rakhi Singh, the 28-year-old wife of Petitioner No. 1, Darshan Singh. The complainant detailed a history of marital discord and harassment since her marriage to Darshan Singh on May 20, 2019.
The core of the allegations revolved around demands for valuable gifts, stating that Darshan Singh, at the instigation of his mother and brother (Petitioners No. 2 and 3, and another accused not named in the petition), subjected her to cruelty. Specifically, the complaint mentioned that Darshan Singh forcibly transferred Rs. 2,00,000/- from her online account.
Further allegations included physical and mental abuse, particularly when Darshan Singh was under the influence of alcohol. The complainant stated that when she informed Petitioner No. 2, Smt. Meera Singh Rajput (mother-in-law), the latter supported her son’s actions. Petitioners No. 3, Dheeraj Singh (brother-in-law) and the un-named accused were also alleged to have cooperated in the harassment. The complaint also highlighted an incident where Darshan Singh, under the influence of alcohol, assaulted her and attempted to kill her by pressing her neck. The complaint was ultimately lodged on August 22, 2023, after an assault on August 20, 2023.
It was also noted that there was an existing property dispute between Darshan Singh and his mother, and the couple had started residing separately at one point.
The Court’s Consideration of Bail
The prosecution, through the learned Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the bail plea, arguing that the investigation was still in progress and that granting bail would allow the petitioners to continue causing mental and physical harassment, destroy evidence, tamper with witnesses, and hamper the investigation. The complainant’s counsel also filed written arguments opposing the application.
In its analysis, the court acknowledged the serious nature of the allegations and that a prima facie case existed. However, the judge proceeded to examine the nature of the alleged offences in the context of anticipatory bail.
The court noted that the offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, and 506 IPC are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Crucially, the non-bailable offence under Section 498A IPC is exclusively triable by the Magistrate. This classification is a vital factor in considering a pre-arrest bail plea, as the rigours imposed for more serious, capital crimes are not applicable.
The court observed that the core dispute was a matrimonial dispute between the first petitioner (husband) and the complainant. The court reasoned that since the petitioners’ apprehension of arrest in a non-bailable offence was justifiable, and they were ready to abide by the terms and conditions set by the court, “no purpose will be served by allowing the respondent police to apprehend the petitioners and to keep them in custody.”
Furthermore, the court accepted that the petitioners were permanent residents of the address provided, a fact undisputed by the prosecution, making the question of absconding highly unlikely. The court ultimately concluded that the objections raised by the prosecution regarding tampering with evidence could be sufficiently met by imposing stringent conditions.
Conditions for Release
The court answered Point No. 1 in the affirmative, allowing the petition and ordering the petitioners to be released on anticipatory bail upon executing a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned I.O./Magistrate.
The bail was granted subject to several stringent conditions, including:
- The petitioners must make themselves available for interrogation by the I.O. as and when required until the final report is filed.
- Petitioner No. 1 (Darshan Singh) shall mark his attendance twice a month (first and third Sunday) between 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM before the I.O. until the filing of the final report.
- The petitioners shall surrender before the concerned Police within 30 days from the date of the order.
- They shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, nor intimidate the complainant or prosecution witnesses.
- They shall not commit similar offences or any offences during the pendency of the case.
- They shall not leave the jurisdiction of Bangalore City or change their residence without prior permission or intimation.
This order ensures that the investigation can proceed while protecting the liberty of the petitioners, pending the filing of the charge sheet.