IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT

BANGALORE RURAL AT NELAMANGALA

CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION. OF 2023

IN

Crime No. 49/2022

BETWEEN:

Madineni Rajesh
S/o Venkateshwara Rao
Aged 37 years
Residing at 1-136/A-1, Lingagudem
Krishna, Andhra Pradesh 521 190
(Arrayed as Accused No.2) : PETITIONER

AND:

The State of Karnataka

Nelamangala Rural Police Station
Represented by the
Learned Public Prosecutor
Nelamangala : RESPONDENT

PETITION UNDER SECTION 438 OF THE CODE OF

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

The Petitioner in the above matter submits as hereunder:

1. The address of the petitioner for the purpose of service of

summons, notices, etc. is as shown in the cause title and that of his

Advocates, VR Vinaykumar & BH Naveen, Office at No.258, 3rd

Main Road, Chramrajpete, Bangalore 560 018.

2. The address of the respondent is as shown in the cause title

and the copy of this petition has also been served on the learned

public prosecutor, Nelamangala, Bangalore Rural.

 2
3. The aforesaid petition is preferred by the accused No.2

seeking for anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 49/2022

registered by Nelamangala Rural Police Station, pending on the file

of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dv) & JMFC Court, Nelamangala,

Bangalore Rural District.

4. The aforesaid crime is registered by the respondent police on

basis of a complaint filed the divorced wife of the 1 st accused. This

petitioner is the brother of the 1st accused and the aforesaid case is

got registered to serve some twisted private ends of the complainant.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

5. The case of the de facto complaint is that she is married to the

1st accused herein and is working as a software engineer, residing at

Bhavikere Village, Nelamangala Taluk. It is her further case that she

is under the case and custody of R Anand and that she is the

daughter of Venkateshwarullu and Venkayamma. That she has two

siblings namely Pushpalatha and Venu. She has further stated that

she has graduated as an engineer from Queens College, Andhra

Pradesh and pursuant to her graduation between the years 2010 to

2012 she has stated to have made efforts to secure seat for post

graduation (M.S) at Hyderabad. She has purported to have got

acquainted to the 1st accused herein who was pursuing engineering at

London, United Kingdom and that after 4-5 months of acquaintance

 3
in the January, 2012 she has stated that this petitioner along

with his mother and father have approached the de facto complainant

with an alliance for the 1st accused. She further purports that after

very nearly four months, the family members of the complainant

have has consented to the said wedding and it is alleged that at the

juncture the family members of the accused herein intended to

postpone the wedding, as the petitioner being the eldest son was yet

to be married. It is her further case that her family members agreed

to postpone the wedding and this complainant having found a job in

Malaysia had left the country in June 2012.

6. It is further stated in the complaint that at the time while the

complainant had left to Malaysia, the 1 st accused was pursuing M.S.,

and it is alleged that during 2013, 2014 and 2015, the 1st accused

along with his family members had sought for money to purchase

jewelry and at the request from 07.05.2013 to November 2015 the

complainant through her had paid Rs.65 Lakhs by cash and Rs.25

Lakhs by account transfer. It is her further case that the accused No.1

in the year 2013 had returned from United Kingdom and had joined

the complainant in Malaysia. It is her case that the 1 st accused was

not employed and it is her case that she was taking care of the 1 st

accused during his stay at Malaysia. It is her case that in August

2014, the petitioner herein got married and pursuant to the wedding

the families had decided to solemnize the wedding of the

 4
st
complainant along with 1 accused and since the visa of both

the 1st accused and the complainant were about to expire, the

marriage of the complainant with the 1 st accused was solemnized at

Sub-registrar, Vishakapatnam on 23.10.2015. It is her case that

pursuant to the said wedding the complainant is stated to have left to

Malaysia along with the 1st accused and it is also alleged that he 1 st

accused had not qualified M.S.,, It is specifically alleged that the 1 st

accused has sought for 6 acres of land, one house and Rs.25 lakhs for

purchase of jewelry and when the same was not adhered it is alleged

that the 1st accused returned to India by taking the Gold Jewelry and

Laptop in December 2015.

7. It is further alleged that in January 2016 the complainant has

resigned the job in Malaysia and had returned to India in search of

the 1st accused and it is also stated that she did not know about the

whereabouts of the 1st accused and his mobile number was also

switched off. Since the mobile phone was switched off she has stated

to have visited the house of these petitioners and at the juncture one

of the relatives of the petitioners had intervened and sought to settle

the dispute amicably. It is alleged that in March 2016, the 1 st

accused and his family members have telephoned the complainant

and have abused her in filthy language and it is her case that the 1 st

accused during the ongoing negotiations had filed one petition

seeking for divorce before the Family Court at Hyderabad. It is also

 5
stated that the said petition was dismissed in the year 2020. It is

further stated that yet another petition for divorce was instituted by

the petitioner in 139/2021 before the Nandi Gama Court, Krishna

District and the same is pending adjudication. It is her case that

during pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the 1 st accused along

with the petitioner have threatened the complainant that they would

circulate the morphed nude pictures of the complainant and also

circulate the said video amongst friends, family members and social

media. It is stated that in 10.01.2022 and 28.01.2022 while the

complainant was attending the proceedings along with her brother,

the accused herein have taken the complainant outside the court

premises and have shown a porn video with the morphed photo of

the complainant. It is also alleged that they have sought for Rs.25

lakhs for grant of divorce failing which they have threatened to

circulate the said video. It is further alleged that the 1 st accused

herein has threatened to kill the complainant and flee to Canada.

Based on the aforesaid allegations the complainant herein sought for

registration of criminal case against the petitioner and the 1 st accused

herein. The respondent on basis of the aforesaid falsehood have

registered criminal case against the petitioner in Crime No.49/2022

leveling offences punishable under Section 384, 511, 504 R/W 34 of

the Indian Penal Code.

 6
8. The true facts of the case are that the 1st accused was in a

relationship with the complainant and during their adolescent age,

they have got married without the consent of family members.

Pursuant to the wedding they developed incompatibility and the 1 st

accused was subjected to cruelty which constrained him to file

proceedings for divorce. In order to counterblast the said

proceedings, the complainant instituted false cases against the

1st accused and other family members in Crime 128/2016 and Crime

No. 21/2020 before the Women PS, Hyderabad. The aforesaid

complaint is also one such sort of an attempt of the complainant to

harass the petitioner and his family members.

9. It is submitted that the 1st accused herein is the brother of this

petitioner and they are children of Venkateshwara Rao and are

residents of Krishna District. It is submitted that the 1 st accused

herein was pursuing engineering at Bapatla Engineering College,

Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. The marriage of the 1 st accused

with the complainant was solemnized at Vinayaka Rama Siva

Lakshmivari Mandapam, Vinayakapet, Vishakapatnam as per Hindu

rights and customs. It is submitted that the said marriage was love

marriage and the same was solemnized without the consent of elders

and well-wishers. It is submitted that much prior to the said wedding

the 1st accused was in the live-in relationship with the complainant

and they got acquainted in the year 2010 at Visu Institute at

 7
Ameerpet Hyderabad. It is submitted that the 1st accused was

preparing for GRE entrance coaching to prepare to leave to the

United States of America and in the month of January 2012 the

complainant and the 1st accused got acquainted to each other and

subsequently the same blossomed into love. It is submitted after

three months the 1st accused expressed his intention of going to

United Kingdom for pursuing M.S., and the complainant herein had

also tried for VISA, but the same was rejected and at the juncture on

several instances, the 1st accused herein had rendered financial

assistance to the complainant herein. At later point of time, the

complainant herein got a job in Malaysia and started persuading the

1st accused to join her in Malaysia and at her request; the accused

herein had started to live along with the complainant in Malaysia.

Subsequently the 1st accused herein informed his parents about his

relationship with the complainant herein and the family of this

petitioner and the 1st accused intended to make an enquiry about the

complainant and her family members. This had irked the

complainant and she had hurdled abuses at the relatives who had

made an enquiry despite of their age. The 1 st accused left with no

alternative had informed the complainant’s family about the

ongoing, but they did no heed to the same. Upon all the aforesaid

above, the complainant started tormenting the 1 st accused over

 8
several other marital issues and this constrained him to leave

Malaysia and come back to this hometown.

10. Since the complainant and her family members were harassing

the petitioner and his family members, they were constrained to file

police complaint with SHO, Jaggaiahpet PS on 19.07.2015 and later

due to the intervention of elders and well wishers of both the

families, the marriage was formally arranged in November 2015.

Later the 1st accused left to Malaysia along with the complainant and

all through their stay, the 1st accused was subjected to cruelty. In the

meanwhile, the family of the complainant constantly harassed the 1 st

accused herein and all of sudden she started purporting to be

pregnant. It is pertinent to mention that the marriage itself was not

consummated and the factual position is that the complaint was

never pregnant. The 1st accused had no interest in marrying the

petitioner and the marriage on 23.10.2015 was under undue

influence and upon their relationship over a period of time, the 1 st

accused found there was barely any compatibility. The complainant

had at instances made nasty allegations against the 1 st accused and

his family members and this constrained the 1 st accused to determine

for separation and had therefore filed FCOP/240/2016 before the

Hon’ble IV Addl. District Court, Rangareddy District U/s 12(1)(c) of

the HM Act to declare their marriage as null and void. To counter the

said impending litigation, the complainant herein initiated criminal

 9
proceedings in Crime No. 128/2016 before the Women PS,

Hyderabad U/s 498-A, 509 of IPC Read with 498A of the Dowry

Prohibition Act on 27.02.2016. The police based on the said

allegations filed chargsheet leveling offences as stated above. In the

meanwhile to the dismay of the 1 st accused, the proceedings in

FCOP/240/2016 before the Hon’ble IV Addl. District Court,

Rangareddy District U/s 12(1)(c) of the HM Act came to be

dismissed for non prosecution. In addition to the above Crime No.

21/2020 came to be registered against the 1 st accused herein U/s 494

and 109 of IPC and since the allegations were prima facie “B” report

came to be filed stating the complaint as frivolous.

11. Due to the aforesaid criminal litigation, the 1 st accused was

subjected to severe sufferance mentally and the same had also

affected his career. Upon all the above, the petitioner herein filed

HMOP No. 103/2021 before the Sr. Civil Judge Nandigama Court

U/s 13(1) (ia) of the HM Act, 1955 seeking for dissolution of

marriage. Upon issuance of summons, the complainant appeared

before the Hon’ble Court and filed statement denying the averments

of the plaint therein. The statement of objections filed by the

complainant in the said petition did not make all the allegations

which are wrecked in this complainant. She has only complained

about marital disorder and dowry harassment. It is pertinent to

mention that the ongoing complaint is also filed during pendency of

 10
the proceedings in HMOP No. 103/2021. By the respondents

own motion the petition came to be allowed and the Hon’ble Court

at Nandigama dissolved the said marriage on grounds of cruelty.

Copy of the Judgment dated 01.08.2022 is produced herewith as

Annexure-C.

12. The petitioner submits that during pendency of the aforesaid

litigation before the Hon’ble Court at Nandigama, the respondent

had filed the aforesaid complaint against the petitioner and the 1 st

accused herein. In the event of there being any allegations as

mentioned in the complaint there was no impediment for the

complainant to put forth the same in HMOP No. 103/2021. Further

the complainant never resided in Bangalore and the address shown in

the complaint is also fictitious. The relationship of the complainant

with her care taker is not detailed in the complaint. In the foregoing

for the aforesaid reasons stated above, prima facie the complaint is

malicious and is filed with oblique motive to harass the petitioner

and his family members. The petitioner and his family members are

subjected to cruelty ever since 2015. The marriage of the 1 st accused

is during his adolescence and the same is without consent of family

members. Moreover the order passed in HMOP No. 103/2021 and

the criminal cases registered against the 1 st accused would reflect the

essence of the complainants cruelty. The divorce is also granted

upon the consent of the complainant herein. The complainant with

 11
malicious intention has been maintaining the aforesaid

complaint.

13. The petitioner is innocent and there are also no allegations

against this petitioner. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has

preferred the aforesaid petition seeking for anticipatory bail under

the following amongst other grounds:

GROUNDS

14. The complaint filed is wholly baseless, bald and bereft of

material particulars. The allegations in the complaint/FIR, even if

they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirely, do

not constitute an offence or make out a case against the petitioner.

The criminal proceedings initiated by the complaint are manifestly

malicious and mala fide, intended to being disrepute to the

petitioner.

15. The substance of the complaint is actually a civil dispute

between the parties involved. The complainant has simply disguised

his civil claims as a criminal complaint with the sole motivation of

harassing the petitioner. The petitioner should not be arrested on the

basis of a complaint that clearly abuses the due process of criminal

law to serve some twisted private ends of the complainant. The

entire subject of this matrimonial dispute is dealt in HMOP No.

103/2021.
 12
16. It is submitted offences punishable under 384, 511, 504,

506 R/w 34 of IPC also does not attract against this petitioner as

there is no documentary evidence produced for the alleged transfer.

On scrupulous reading of the entire complaint and the FIR it does

not reveal active participation of the petitioner in commission of the

offence.

17. The petitioner submits that the complainant on her own

motion has consented for divorce in HMOP No. 103/2021. The

ongoing complaint is with malafide intentions to harass this

petitioner and the 1st accused.

18. There is no prima facie case or reasonable ground to believe

the participation of the petitioner in commission of the aforesaid

crime.

19. The nature and gravity of the accusation are also not severe

and is punishable with 3 years. The petitioner is ready and willing to

offer any security as directed by this Hon’ble Court.

20. It is submitted that if the petitioners are arrested, it would be

gross violation and impairment of his personal right to freedom and

the deep grained presumption of innocence. The petitioner is

innocent and it is therefore imperative that he is enabled to establish

the same.
 13
21. The petitioner is a permanent resident of

Lingagudem, Penuganchiprolu Mandal, Krishna District. The

petitioner will not hesitate to appear before the respondent police

when called upon and will accord all possible support and full co-

operation for the investigation.

22. The petitioner submits that he will not tamper with any

evidence or will in any manner interfere with the investigation of the

above case. The petitioner undertakes to be present as and when

required either by the Learned Magistrate or by the offices

investigating the case. The petitioner will also abide by any

condition that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court.

23. The petitioner has not been involved in any criminal case

before nor have they previously undergone imprisonment on

conviction by any court. The petitioner will not flee from justice and

they have their roots in India and the instant case is filed only with

an ulterior motive to injure and humiliate the petitioner.

24. It is submitted that if anticipatory bail as sought in this petition

is not granted the petitioner is likely to be arrested and harassed by

the Police Authorities. It is submitted that in such circumstances, the

personal rights of freedom of the petitioner will be severely

prejudiced. The petitioner fair name and reputation as respectable

member of society will be completely destroyed and the petitioner

 14
will be put to disrepute, which cannot be compensated by

money or its worth. It is submitted that the petitioner will suffer

irreparable loss and injury which cannot be ameliorated, if they are

arrested.

25. It is further submitted that, there is no reasonable grounds to

be believe that even the petitioner has been remotely connected to

the offence as alleged by the respondent police.

26. It is submitted that, none of the above offences are exclusively

punishable with imprisonment for life or death.

27. It is further submitted that, the petitioners most humbly submit

that, he will undertake to abide by any condition or conditions that

this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to imposed. He will neither

abscond nor keep themselves out of the hands of the Police as he is

perusing his legitimate right. If this Hon’ble Court is not pleased to

pass an order as prayed for, they will suffer irreparable loss and

hardship and justice will suffer. The respondent will not be

prejudiced if such an order is passes. It is in the interest of justice to

pass such an order. It is further submitted that, the petitioner craves

the kind indulgence of this Hon’ble Court to raise additional grounds

at the time of submitting their arguments on this petition.

WHEREFORE, the Petitioners in the above case humbly pray

this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant him relief of anticipatory

 15
bail in Crime No. 49/2022 registered by Nelamangala Rural

Police Station for the offences punishable under Sec. 384, 511, 504,

506 R/w 34 of IPC, pending on the file of this Hon’ble Court and

further be pleased to direct the S.H.O., Nelamangala Rural Police

Station to release them on bail in the event of their arrest in the

above crime, in the ends of justice.

BANGALORE

DATED: ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER