ABDUL LATIF Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the augments of the petitioner's counsel and also the learned H.C.G.P. for the respondent.

(2.) This petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1. The factual matrix of the case, is that the mother of the victim has filed the complaint making allegation that this petitioner and other family members have subjected her daughter for harassment and also they were demanding to bring more money from her parents and also subjected her for assault. Particularly, on 15/2/2018 at about 8.00 p.m. she has received a call from her daughter and the victim had revealed that her mother-in-law, sister-in-law and husband of the sisterin- law have confined her in a room and they were assaulting with a belt and on the next day morning, she has received a phone call that her daughter has committed a suicide in the house of the petitioner and thereafter, she went and lodged the complaint. The contention of the petitioner in the petition is that there is no specific allegation against this petitioner regarding the harassment and demand of dowry and general allegation is made against this petitioner as well as other members of the family and the allegations against this petitioner is that he also subjected her for harassment. It is contended that he is in custody from 18/2/2018 and now the investigation has been completed and the police have filed the charge sheet and he is ready to obey the conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

(3.) The learned HCGP in his arguments contends that the marriage was taken place at 17/5/2017 and she has committed suicide on 16/2/2018 and that too in the residence of this petitioner. He further contends that all the family members also subjected the deceased for harassment and when she was unable to tolerate the harassment, she took an extreme step to commit suicide. She also left a death note before committing the suicide and in the death note, she has made an allegation against this petitioner and also against other three persons. Hence, there is a prima facia material to believe the case of the prosecution and hence, the petitioner is not entitled for bail.