Dileshwari W/O Ashish Harinkhede v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso, Salekasa, Tah. Salekasa, Dist. Gondia

(1) 953 954 aba 307-308-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 307 OF 2025 Dileshwari W/o Ashish Harinkhede Vs.

State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Salekasa, District Gondia AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 308 OF 2025 Indubai W/o Hemantrao Harinkhede Vs.

State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Salekasa, District Gondia ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. K.R. Jhamb, a/w Bhupesh Patel, Advocate for applicant Mrs. M.A. Barabde, APP for respondent/State in ABA No. 307/2025 Mr. A.J. Gohokar, APP for respondent/State in ABA No. 308/2025 CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

DATED : 17/06/2025 .

Apprehending the arrest at the hands of police in connection with Crime No. 124/2025, registered with Police Station Salekasa, District Gondia for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 108 and 3(5) of the BNS Act, 2023, the applicants approached to this Court for grant of prearrest bail. 2.

The applicant in Application No. 308/2025 is mother-in-law and applicant in Application No. 307/2025 is sister-in-law. The marriage of the deceased was performed with the co-accused Ajay Harindhede on 09/03/2021. After marriage she resumed cohabitation at the house of the present

(2) 953 954 aba 307-308-2025 applicants and the other co-accused. As per the allegations on 13/03/2025 when deceased had been to the house of the informant, she disclosed that she was ill-treated by the present applicants and the other co-accused for the demand to purchase of the gold necklace and plot. On the basis of the said report, police have registered crime against both the applicants.

3.

Learned Counsel submitted that the allegations levelled against both the applicants are general in nature and is not sufficient to attract the offence of abetment. As far as custodial interrogation is concerned which is not required and prays for the grant of anticipatory bail.

4.

Learned APP strongly opposed the applications on the ground that within seven years of marriage, the death of the deceased is caused. There is specific allegations against both the applicants. In view of that, applications deserves to be rejected. 5.

On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the recitals of the FIR it reveals that general allegations are levelled against both the applicants who are Mother-in-law and sister-in-law. As far as the custodial interrogation is concerned, which is not required. The nature of the allegations at this stage, are not sufficient to attract the offence of abetment. Considering the same, the applicants have made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order.

(3) 953 954 aba 307-308-2025

ORDER

(i) Both the applications are allowed.

(ii) The interim protection granted to the applicants by order dated 06/05/2025, is hereby confirmed on the condition that the applicants shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required for the investigation purpose and shall cooperate with the investigating agency. (iii) The applicants shall not induce threat or promise any witnesses who are acquainted with the facts of the case either personally or by way of electronic media.

Both the applications are disposed of.

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) Jayashree..