AKRAM SHARIFF Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

(2.) The petitioner is accused of the offences punishable under Section 498 -A, 302, 114 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The facts are, according to the complainant, his daughter Shabeen Baanu was in love with the present petitioner and their marriage was performed and they led a peaceful married life in the beginning and they even had two children in the first three years of their marriage. However, the petitioner who was addicted to alcohol thereafter started neglecting the wife and children. In fact, he was thrown out of his house by his father and had to set up a separate home. On 06.08.2014, it transpires that the petitioner had physically and mentally abused his wife Shabeen Baanu and therefore, she had taken refuge in the complainant's house in the same village along with her children. However, accused followed her there and brought back the children from the complainant's house. At about 8.30 p.m. on the same night, the deceased victim had come in search of her children and a quarrel had ensued between the petitioner and his wife. In the process, the petitioner is alleged to have poured kerosene on her body and set her ablaze and she had succumbed to burn injuries on 07.08.2014 at 8.20 p.m. It is on the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered and the same has been investigated and a charge sheet has been filed.

(3.) The bail application of the petitioner has been rejected by the court below, on the ground that there was sufficient material to implicate the petitioner and since the punishment attracted is serious, the petitioner was not entitled to be enlarged on bail as he is likely to threaten the witnesses and also may jump bail. It is in this background, the present petition is filed. Given the circumstances, after the petitioner had allegedly set his wife ablaze, it is on her cries that neighbors have taken her to the hospital and admitted her. According to the prosecution, the victim's brother has elicited from the victim as to the sequence of events and those statements were strong evidence against the petitioner. Given the fact that she had suffered 85% burn injuries and the circumstance that the petitioner was not present even according to the complainant at the time the witness had arrived at the scene, it cannot be said that the petitioner is squarely implicated though circumstances may point to the guilt of the accused and that by itself would not disentitle the petitioner to be granted bail. Given the circumstance that charge sheet has been filed and the statement of witnesses have been recorded, the witnesses being the brother of the victim, are hardly susceptible to influence. Therefore, there is no impediment in granting bail to the petitioner as the guilt would have to be established at the trial. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.