Sheetal Chandrakant Chalke v. The State Of Maharashtra

Santosh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2468 OF 2019 Sheetal Chandrakant Chalke ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

None for the Applicant.

Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the State/Respondent.

CORAM:

N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATED :

7th AUGUST, 2021 PC:- 1.

By virtue of this application the applicant, who is the wife of the deceased Chandrakant Chalke, who allegedly committed suicide on 14th September, 2018, has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.169 of 2019 registered with Shrinagar Police Station, Thane, for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("the Penal Code").

2.

The mother of the deceased, namely, Sunita Chalke, the frst informant, lodged a report bearing CR No.169/2019 on 11th September, 2019 with the allegations that the deceased committed suicide on 14th September, 2018, leaving behind a suicide note to the effect that the applicant, his wife, and her two friends namely, Maya and Sneha Gavkar, ruined his life 1/3

and, therefore, he took his life. The FIR was evidently lodged after about one year of the alleged occurrence without accounting for the delay in lodging the report. Thus by order dated 14th November, 2019, this Court granted interim relief to the applicant.

3.

Today none appears for the applicant.

4.

I have heard Mr. Sait, the learned APP for the State. 5.

From the perusal of the FIR, it becomes evident that the deceased and the applicant were estranged. The deceased was in a depressed of mind on account of mental discord. It further appears that the deceased was with the informant and her husband on the night intervening 13th September, 20218 and 14th September, 2018. The contents of the suicide note, even if taken at par, do not make out a case of abettment to commit suicide, even remotely. There are general allegations, which indicate that the marital life of the deceased and the applicant was not satisfactory. The frst informant has made no endeavour to explain the delay in lodging the FIR 6.

In any event, the custodial interrogation of the applicant does not seem to be warranted for any purpose. The applicant seems to have roots in the society and the possibility of tampering with the evidence and feeing away from justice also appears remote.

2/3

7.

In the aforesaid view of the matter, I am persuaded to allow the application and make the interim order dated 14th November, 2019, absolute on the same terms and conditions. In addition, in the event the charge-sheet is fled, the applicant shall attend the Court regularly.

8.

Application stands disposed of.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 3/3