Vishnu Sopanrao Pawar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2024:BHC-AUG:25033

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1512 OF 2024 Vishnu Sopanrao Pawar

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra And Another *** • Mr. P. P. More, Advocate for the Applicant • Mr. P. P. Dawalkar, APP for the Respondent/State *** CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J DATE : OCTOBER 15, 2024 PER COURT :

1.

Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with with C.R. No. 556/2024 registered with Gandhi Chowk Police Station, Dist. Latur for the offences punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 2.

First information report is lodged by the police personnel stating that on 10.08.2024 at about 10.20 am it was revealed to Yogesh Halikhede that in his premises, which was let out to Pramod Koyale one person has committed suicide by hanging himself. Later on, it was found that deceased has left a suicidal note wherein a name of the present Applicant is mentioned. It is stated therein that the Applicant is responsible

for his death as he is not returning his money and, therefore, he had to sell his house.

3.

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the family members of the deceased have never lodged any complaint against Applicant and present report is lodged after about 10 days after occurrence of incident by a police personnel. It is his submission that there is absolutely no evidence to indicate that any money was due to the deceased from the Applicant. According to him, having regard to the facts of the case custodial interrogation of the Applicant is not necessary.

4.

Learned APP opposed the application by drawing attention of the Court to the suicide note left behind by the deceased wherein name of the Applicant is mentioned to be responsible for his death. It is submitted that there is statement with regard to non payment of money due to deceased by the Applicant. 5.

Though the name of the Applicant is mentioned in the suicide note to be the person responsible for

the death of the deceased, statements of the members of the family of the deceased do not indicate that there was any money transaction between Applicant and deceased. This Court finds substance in the contention of the learned Counsel for the Applicant that if there was any such money transaction at least one of the family member would have known about the same. 6.

Having regard to the aforestated facts, the custodial interrogation of the Applicant is not necessary. For further investigation, remained if any, appropriate direction to the Applicant to cooperate in the investigation agency is sufficient. Hence, the order:

O R D E R

(i) In the event of arrest of the Applicant in connection with C.R. No. 556/2024 registered with Gandhi Chowk Police Station, Dist. Latur for the offences punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, he shall be released on bail on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount.

(ii) He shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

(iii) He shall not contact the witnesses directly

or indirectly.

(iv) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever.

(v) He is further directed to cooperate the investigating agency for further investigation.

(R.M. JOSHI, J.)