CHANDRA MOHAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with accused No.1 on 28/5/2017 and at the time of marriage, they have given 25 grams of golden chain, 10 grams of ring and an amount of Rs.5,00,000.00 as cash. In the said wedlock, they have been blessed with two children aged about five years and one year and nine months respectively. The complainant is a government servant and accused No.1 has allegedly married the complainant for money and property. After the marriage, he never led peaceful life with the complainant by showing love and affection. The accused No.1 always said that the dowry given was not sufficient and continued to mentally torture the complainant on the instigation of accused Nos.2 to 6. Accused No.1 is now working as a teacher at Shakapura Village, Government School of Raichur District and he had been visiting once in a fortnight during holiday and whenever he was visiting, he was forcefully snatching the salary amount and on so many occasions, petitioner No.1 allegedly assaulted the complainant and inspite of that, the complainant tolerated all the harassment. It is also the specific allegation in the complaint that on 21/1/2024 between 10.30 p.m. and 11.00 p.m., petitioner No.1 demanded the complainant to pay the entire salary of the complainant and to get the site standing in the name of the mother to be transferred to his name and when the complainant did not agree for the same, he assaulted her and mishandled her and tried to take away her life by tightly holding her neck. Based on the complaint, the police have registered the case on 6/3/2024 for the offences punishable under Ss. 498A, 307, 323, 114, 504, 506 read with Sec. 149 of IPC and Ss. 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The matter is still under investigation.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the present complaint is offshoot of the earlier complaint given by her husband on 2/2/2024 alleging that she is not allowing him to take care of his aged mother who is suffering from cancer and abusing him and causing threat and hence requested the police to call and advice her and hence in the complaint by putting anti-date, a false allegation is made. The learned counsel also brought to the notice of this Court the endorsement given by the police and so also produced the documents with regard to the mother is suffering from cancer and taking treatment at Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology. The learned counsel submits that petitioner No.1 is also an employee and petitioner Nos.3 to 5 are the sisters of petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.6 is the brother of petitioner No.1, who is working in police department and the mother who is petitioner No.2 is suffering from cancer and all of them have been falsely implicated in the case. The learned counsel submits that the alleged incident, according to the complainant, is dtd. 21/1/2024 and the complaint was given on 6/3/2024. The police had called and adviced her based on the complaint of petitioner No.1 dtd. 2/2/2024 and only afterthought, a false complaint is lodged and the Trial Court committed an error in dismissing the anticipatory application filed by the petitioners. Hence, this Court has to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioners by granting anticipatory bail.