Shaikh Sameera @ Kajal (Reshma) D/O. Shaikh Abdul Haee v. The State Of Maharashtra

Cri. Appln.No. 1913/17

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 910 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1913 OF 2017 SHAIKH SAMEERA @ KAJAL (RESHMA) D/O. SHAIKH ABDUL HAEE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Jadhav Kiran D.

APP for Respondent/State : Mr. R.V. Dasalkar ...

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J.

DATED : May 3, 2017.

ORDER :

1.

The application is filed for relief of anticipatory bail. Both the sides are heard. Papers of investigation were made available to this Court for perusal.

2.

The crime is registered on the basis of report given by one Fahimkhan Miyakhan Pathan. The present applicant was the second wife of the first informant and she has one issue from him. The marriage was dissolved and at the time of dissolution of marriage, the first informant had agreed to give money for maintenance of the child. According to him, he was giving Rs.120/- on every alternate day by plying auto rickshaw. The incident in question took place on 18.3.2017. According to him, after 10.00 p.m. when he went to hand over the money after parking the auto rickshaw in front of the house of applicant and

Cri. Appln.No. 1913/17 when he entered the house, she picked up quarrel. He has made allegations that during quarrel, she went to auto rickshaw and from there, she brought the bottle containing petrol and by using that petrol, she set fired to the first informant. The report was given on 18.3.2017 itself and the crime is registered for the offence punishable under section 307 of I.P.C. 3.

This Court has seen the record like medical examination of the first informant. There were burn injuries over anterior portion of both shoulders, anterior aspect of neck, both arms and distal portion of both hands anteriorly. The extent of burn injury is 15% to 20%. There there is material of aforesaid nature as against the present applicant. Though she is a lady, in view of the aforesaid material, this Court holds that protection of anticipatory bail cannot be given in her favour. The application stands rejected.

[ T.V. NALAWADE, J. ] ssc/