Rameshwar S/O Narhari Panchal v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6966 OF 2014 Rameshwar s/o. Narhari Panchal ....Applicant.

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent.

Mr. Mayur Salunke h/f. Mr. V.D. Salunke, Advocate for applicant. Mr. R.P. Phatke, APP for State.

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J.

DATED : 6th January, 2015.

ORDER :

1.

The application is filed for bail. Both the sides are heard. This Court has perused the papers of investigation. On instruction, submission was made by the learned counsel for the applicant that this is the first application filed for bail in this Court and no similar application is filed in this court or in the Hon'ble Apex Court.

2.

The crime is registered on the basis of report given by brother of deceased. The deceased was given in marriage on 5.5.2011. The incident took place on 5.9.2014 in the matrimonial house of the deceased where deceased committed suicide by

hanging herself. Allegations are made that since beginning there was illtreatment to the deceased. Allegations are made that for purchasing a machine for carpentry work, the applicant was demanding Rs. one lakh from the parents of the deceased and as the demand was not met with, illtreatment was given to her. Allegations are made that on one occasion, present applicant had tried to press the neck of the deceased. It is also alleged that the kick blow was given on the abdomen of the deceased when she was pregnant. It is contended that ultimately the deceased was driven out of the matrimonial house and only due to the efforts of Grievance Redressal Committee, there was settlement of the dispute and the deceased had returned to the matrimonial house in March 2013. It is contended that even after returning of the deceased to the matrimonial house, there was no improvement in the conduct of the applicant. 3.

The P.M. report shows that death took place due to hanging. From F.I.R. and other record, it can be said that the allegations in respect of illtreatment, which was allegedly given after March 2013, are vague in nature. The applicant is behind bars since September 2014. In view of these circumstances and as it is not certain as to how much time will be required to dispose of the case, this Court holds that it is not desirable to

keep the applicant behind bars till the disposal of the case. 4.

In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant is to be released on bail on his furnishing PR and SB of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand). He is not to tamper the prosecution witnesses. He is not to enter the village of witnesses till the disposal of the case.

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