T. THIMMARAJU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Public Prosecutor.

(2.) THE petitioner is said to be the husband of one Roopa who was married to him in the year 2009. It is alleged that the petitioner was provided with dowry of 100 grams gold, one motor cycle and Rs. 2.00 lakh by way of cash. However, it is alleged that the petitioner and his family members consisting of his mother, father, sisters and brothers -in -law had constantly harassed Roopa for dowry and had tortured her both physically and mentally. This had driven her to commit suicide, by hanging. On the basis of the complaint, the petitioner and his family members were arraigned as accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

(3.) THE allegations were generally made against all the members of the family including the petitioner, of such ill -treatment of physical and mental harassment meted out to the deceased during her life time. The Court below having thought it fit to grant bail to all the family members, it ought to have granted bail to the petitioner on the same token of reasoning. Hence, it is inexplicable that though there are no serious allegations against the petitioner specifically, only because the petitioner is the husband of the deceased, the rejection of bail to the present petitioner is unfair and leads to a miscarriage of justice.