1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3392 OF 2020

BETWEEN:

1. SRI V.M. UMESH KUMAR

S/O. SRI V. MANJUNATH,
AGED 33 YEARS.

2. SRI V. MANJUNATH
S/O. LATE SRI VENKATARAMAIAH,
AGED 60 YEARS.

3. SMT. V.M. KUMARI

W/O. SRI V. MANJUNATH,
AGED 55 YEARS.

PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 3 ARE

RESIDING AT NO.31/180, M.R. LANE,
AKKIPETE CROSS,
BENGALURU.

4. SRI PADMANABHAN
S/O. SRI SAMPANGIRAM
AGED 61 YEARS.

5. ANUSUYA @ ANUMAKKA
W/O. SRI PADMANABHAN
AGED 56 YEARS.

6. SRI HARISH KUMAR

S/O. SRI PADMANABHAN
AGED 33 YEARS.
 2

PETITIONER NOS.4 TO 6 ARE

RESIDING AT NO.HIG-B-5-76,
BUILDING NO.63, 1ST FLOOR,
KHB COLONY (SHIRKE APARTMENT)
KH TOWN,
BENGALURU.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. T.R. RAJESHWARI, ADV.)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE POLICE COMMISSIONER,
INFANTRY ROAD,
BENGALURU.

2. STATE BY COTTON PET POLICE STATION

COTTON PET,
BENGALURU.

3. STATE BY KENGERI POLICE STATION

KENGERI,
BANGALORE-MYSORE ROAD,
BENGALURU.

4. STATE
BY THE SECRETARY,
DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITY (D.L.S.A.),
OLD DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
CHITTOOR,
ANDHRA PRADESH.

5. DISHA POLICE STATION (WOMEN’S POLICE STATION)

DARGA CIRCLE,
BEHIND II TOWN POLICE STATION,
CHITTOOR,
ANDHRA PRADESH.

... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, H.C.G.P., FOR R-1 TO 3)
 3

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF

CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE
EVENT OF THEIR ARREST BY ANY OF THE RESPONDENT-POLICE
WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE RESPONDENT ON THE
COMPLAINT OF SMT. BHAVYASHREE FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S.
498A OF THE I.P.C. AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF THE D.P. ACT.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS,

THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1

to 6 under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for granting

anticipatory bail on the complaint filed by the wife of

petitioner No.1, namely Smt. Bhavyashree, for the alleged

offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian

Penal Code (for short, ‘the I.P.C.’) and Sections 3 and 4 of

the Dowry Prohibition Act (for short, ‘the D.P. Act’).

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for

the petitioners and the learned High Court Government

Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 3.

 4

3. The petitioners have contended that said

Bhavyashree has filed complaint to 5th respondent-Disha

Police Station, Andhra Pradesh and they are trying to

arrest these petitioners without registering a case. If the

petitioners are arrested, they will be put to hardship and

loss. A legal notice is also issued on 23-5-2020 calling

upon petitioner No.1 to make a separate house. On

9-6-2020, another notice is issued by the District Legal

Service Authority on the complaint of Bhavyashree.

Petitioner No.1 also replied to the same and he is also

ready to live with his wife by making separate house. In

spite of the same, the petitioners are apprehending their

arrest on the hands of the Police. They are residing at

Bengaluru. Chittoor Police may arrest the petitioners

through Cottonpet and Kengeri Police, Bengaluru.

Therefore, in case they are arrested, they will put into

 5

hardship. The petitioners require some time to appear

before Chittoor Court. Hence, prayed for granting bail.

4. The Learned High Court Government Pleader has

objected the bail petition and contended that no case has

been registered against the petitioners. Complaint came

to be filed before the District Legal Services Authority.

There is no question of arresting the petitioners by the

Police. The apprehension is only illusionary. Hence, he

prayed for dismissing the petitions.

5. Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of

the record, it goes to show that petitioner No.1 married to

Bhavyashree and due to some difference of opinion, they

are residing separately. Wife of petitioner No.1 has given

complaint to the Protection Officer at Chittoor and

accordingly, a notice has been issued to petitioner No.1 to

appear on 1-7-2020. Names of all the petitioners were

 6

mentioned in the notice. Another notice is issued to the

petitioners by Superintendent In-charge Legal Services

Authority and Whatsapp notice is also sent by Disha

Police Station, Chittoor which demonstrates that the wife

of petitioner No.1 filed a complaint to the Police and for

the purpose of enquiry, the Police have summoned the

petitioners to Chittoor-Disha Police Station. If the

petitioners appear before the Police, there is every

possibility of arresting them by the Police on the complaint

of Bhavyashree is not ruled out. It is well settled by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court that registering a F.I.R. is not a

sine-quo non granting anticipatory bail. There is real

apprehension that the petitioners are apprehending their

arrest in the hands of Disha Police Station on the

accusation of having committed non-bailable offence,

much less the offence punishable under Section 498A of

 7

the I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act. Therefore,

the petitioners are entitled for anticipatory bail.

6. Admittedly, the petitioners are resident of

Benguluru City and the complaint is filed at Chittoor,

Andhra Pradesh, which is a different State. A Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court has granted anticipatory bail in the

case of SRI MAHABOOD SHARIFF AND ANOTHER v.

STATE BY SHOPIAN POLICE STATION, JAMMU AND

KASHMIR in Criminal Petition No.6023 of 2017 dated

2-8-2017, in the case of M.S. GAMESKRAFT

TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS v. THE

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS in Criminal

Petition No.2681 of 2019 dated 10-4-2019 and in the case

of MR. GIRISH KUMAR N. v. THE STATE OF

MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS in Criminal Petition

No.3958 of 2017 dated 25-5-2017. Further, the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case BHADRESH BIPINBHAI

 8

SHETH v. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER in

Criminal Appeal Nos.1134-1135 of 2015 (arising out of

S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos.6028-6029 OF 2014) has reiterated the

principles for grant of anticipatory bail. Merely, the case

was registered at Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh, the bail

cannot be rejected as the petitioners are resident of

Karnataka State. Keeping in mind that petitioner No.1 is

ready to live a marital life with his wife and due to

spreading of COVID-19, if bail is granted to the

petitioners, no prejudice would cause to the complainant’s

case. Further, as per the submission of the learned

counsel for the petitioners, the father of Bhavyashree is a

Police official in Andhra Pradesh and every chance of

using the influence and harassing the petitioner cannot be

ruled out. Therefore, without prejudicing to the

investigation and in order to prevent harassment,

humiliation and unjustified detention of the petitioner,

 9

anticipatory bail is required to be granted. Accordingly, I

proceed to pass the following

ORDER

Petition is allowed.

The petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 6 are ordered to be

released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest on

the complaint of Bhavyashree, wife of petitioner No.1, for

the offences under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Sections

3 and 4 of the D.P. Act and for any other offences, subject

to following conditions:

i) Petitioners shall execute a personal bond

in a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty-

five thousand only) each with a surety for

the likesum to the satisfaction of the

Investigating Officer;
 10

ii) Petitioners shall appear before the

Investigating officer within one month

from the date of receipt of a certified copy

of this order;

iii) Petitioners shall co-operate with the

investigation and they should appear

before the Investigating Officer as and

when they are ordered to do so;

iv) Petitioners shall also appear before the

District Legal Services Authority or before

the Protection Officer for the purpose of

conciliation; and

v) In case, case is registered against the

petitioners, after the release by the

Investigating Officer, they shall move for

regular bail before the jurisdictional

 11

Magistrate and the jurisdictional

Magistrate is at liberty to dispose of the

bail application without influencing this

order.

Sd/-
JUDGE

kvk