SANTOSH BASAPPA GEJAPATI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in Crime No.43/2021 of Nesargi Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Section 306 of IPC.

(2.) The factual matrix leading to the case are that the daughter of the complainant was given in marriage to her maternal uncle by name Nagaraj and their marriage was solemnized on 25.12.2020. It is alleged that on 10-11 days prior to the death, his son-in-law Nagaraj brought the deceased and left her in the house of the present complainant because of onset of Ashada Masa. On 16.07.2021 at 2.00 p.m., the present petitioner came to his house and picked up a quarrel with his deceased daughter alleging that she should accompany him, as he is loving her. It is further asserted that he will consume poison if she does not accompany him. He further threatened to upload the photos of himself and the deceased in the status. Thereafter, the complainant pacified the dispute and brought it to the notice of the villagers. In the meanwhile, petitioner has put her photos in the status. The panchayat members have discussed this issue and in the meanwhile, on 18.07.2021 at about 6.00 a.m. they found that the daughter of the complainant committed suicide by consuming some poisoness substance. A death note was found asserting that, as the petitioner has put the status, she suffered mentally and as such, she has committed suicide due to humiliation. Hence, the complainant has lodged this complaint. On the basis of the complaint, the investigating officer has registered a crime in Nesargi P.S. crime No.43/2021 for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC. The present petitioner was apprehended and he was remanded to judicial custody. Thereafter, the petitioner moved a bail petition before the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi and the learned Sessions Judge by order dated 05.08.2021 rejected the bail petition. Hence, the petitioner claims that he has approached this court seeking regular bail.

(3.) Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent- State. Perused the records.