ROOPA VAJJANNAVAR (ROOPA BYADAGI) Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal petition is filed by the petitioneraccused No.5 under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying to release her on anticipatory bail in Crime No.38/2020 of Old Hubballi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 34, 498A and 302 of IPC.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that one Gangavva w/o Chandru Dundi gave complaint on 17.04.2020 stating that her daughter Karemma has been given in marriage to accused No.1-Mallikarjun 12 years ago and after marriage, Karemma was residing with her husband-accused No.1 and inlaws/ accused Nos.2 and 3, brother-in-law/accused No.4 and sister-in-law/accused No.5-the petitioner herein. It is further alleged that accused No.1 was having illicit relationship with a woman and the said fact was disclosed by Karemma to the complainant. It is further alleged that on 16.04.2020 at about 9.30 pm one Devendra informed the complainant and again one Parshuram has called to said Devendra that Karemma husband, mother-in law, father-in-law and family members have set fire to Karemma and she suffered burn injures. It is further alleged that the complainant and her family members were proceeding to the house of accused No.1 and on the way they saw Karemma was taken in a TUM TUM vehicle and at that time, on seeing them, accused No.1 who was in the TUM TUM vehicle went away and the deceased told them that accused Nos.1 to 5 set fire to her and locked in a room and she suffered burn injuries. The said Karemma was admitted KIMS hospital and on 20.04.2020, Karemma succumbed to burn injuries. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.38/2020 of Old Hubli Police Station. The Investigating Officer has filed charge sheet. Anticipatory Bail application filed by the petitioneraccused No.5 in Crl.Misc. No.23/2020 came to be rejected by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad sitting at Hubballi. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking anticipatory bail.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.5 and also the learned HCGP for the respondent-State.