Gajanan Vitthal Rathod And Others v. The Superintendent Of Police, Jalna And Another

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 624 OF 2023 1.

Gajanan s/o Vitthal Rathod 2.

Vitthal s/o Ganpat Rahod 3.

Ranjana w/o Vitthal Rathod 4.

Laxmi Gajanan Rathod Applicants

Versus

The Superintendent of Police & another Respondents Mr. P. P. More, Advocate for the applicants.

Mr. S. N. Morampalle, APP for the State.

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.

DATE : 21st JUNE, 2023.

PER COURT :

1.

Applicants are the in-laws of the deceased who committed suicide by jumping into the well on 7th April, 2023. On the basis of First Information Report lodged by the brother of the deceased, crime was registered vide Crime No. 54/2023 with Shewli Police Station, Dist. Jalna.

2.

It is alleged in the First Information Report that the husband as well as in-laws of the deceased were causing harassment

- 2 - to her for bringing sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- for purchase of motorcycle. It is also alleged that they used to cause harassment to her by taunting that she is unable to work and that she does not wake up early. It is alleged that when the deceased was pregnant, at that time also, such harassment was continued.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicants states that the husband of the deceased after his arrest is already released on regular bail. It is contended that there are no particulars given as to the date and time of the alleged demand of dowry or harassment caused to the deceased.

4.

Learned APP opposed the application relying upon the investigation papers more particularly statement of neighbouring witness as well as relatives of the deceased. 5.

Perusal of the First Information Report shows that no particulars are given as to when demand of Rs. 1,50,000/- was made by the applicants herein. Prima facie perusal of the statements of witness except for mother and close relatives of deceased, there is nothing to show that any harassment was caused by the present

- 3 - applicants to the deceased. On the contrary, from the statement of one of the relatives of the deceased, it reveals that there was some dispute between the deceased and her husband. 6.

Having regard to these facts, liberty of the applicants deserve to be protected. Hence, application is allowed in terms of the interim order.

( R. M. JOSHI) Judge dyb