Bombay High CourtABA/93/2024disposed off

Agyaprasad L. Mishra v. The State Of Maharashtra

2024-08-07Hon'Ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 93 OF 2024 Agyaprasad L. Mishra ...Applicant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Shekhar Bhise i/by Vrushali Patil for the Applicant. Mr.A. A. Naik, APP for the Respondent - State. by ETHAPE DNYANESHWAR ASHOK Date:

2024.08.08 19:47:24 +0530

CORAM

N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATE :

7th AUGUST 2024 ETHAPE DNYANESHWAR ASHOK PC.

This is an application for pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 261 of 2022 registered with Kapurbawdi Police Station, Thane for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2.

In fact, this is the second application for pre-arrest bail. The first application, being ABA/3624/2022, preferred by the applicant and another co-accused was withdrawn by an order dated 17th October 2023.

Subsequent thereto, this Court was persuaded to grant prearrest bail to Mithileshdevi A. Mishra, another co-accused and the wife of the applicant, by an order dated 11th December 2023. In the said order, this Court had noted the gravamen of indictment and the nature of the evidence, especially the medical evidence, and,

thereafter, recorded the reasons which persuaded the Court to grant pre-arrest bail. The observations of this Court in the said order deserve extraction. They read as under:- "3) The marriage of the daughter of the first informant was solemnized with the son of the applicant on 21st May, 2021. The first informant alleged that the applicant used to harass the deceased on the count that she was not doing household work and not speaking with rest of the family members. The deceased was brought to her parental home. The deceased was suffering from Epilepsy. It is alleged that even after payment of a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the applicant and the co-accused, they did not provide medical treatment to the deceased. Thus, the deceased was being treated at Nair Hospital.

4) It is alleged that in the month of March, 2022, the deceased informed the first informant that the applicant had assaulted her. It seems in the month of July, the deceased was brought to her parental home and, thereafter, admitted M. V. Desai Hospital, Malad. The first informant alleged at that time there were marks of injuries on the person of the deceased. The deceased passed away on 14th July, 2022, while she was admitted at M. V. Desai Hospital. Hence, the report.

5) The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR singularly lacks allegations of demand of dowry. In fact, the deceased was suffering from Epilepsy and was under treatment for a long time. Thus, the death of the deceased cannot be said to have occurred in unnatural circumstances. It was further submitted that the husband of the deceased was arrested and has since been released on bail. Investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has been lodged.

6) The learned APP invited the attention of the court to the external injuries, noted on the person of the deceased, in Column No. 17 of the PM report. The learned APP, fairly invited the attention of the Court to the opinion of the Medical Officer dated 21st September, 2022, wherein it was opined that the injuries were fresh and could have been sustained by the deceased during her hospital stay because of restraining the patient during the episode of seizure. Those injuries were not sufficient to cause death of the deceased in the ordinary course of nature.

7) In view of the aforesaid nature of the medical

evidence, coupled with the allegations in the FIR, which prima facie indicate that the deceased had been suffering from Epilepsy and was under treatment, the question as to whether the deceased died in unnatural circumstances, appears to be a matter for adjudication at the trial. In any, event, since the investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been lodged, custodial interrogation of the applicant does not seem to be warranted to an effective investigation. I am, therefore, impelled to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant."

Evidently, this Court had found that, the question as to whether the deceased died in unnatural circumstances, appeared to be a matter for adjudication at the trial, as in the opinion of the Medical Officer dated 21st September 2022 it was noted that the injuries were fresh and could have been sustained by the deceased during her hospital stay because of restraining the patient during the episode of seizure and those injuries were not sufficient to cause death of the deceased in the ordinary course of nature. 5.

The aforesaid reasons govern the claim of the applicant for pre-arrest bail. Prima facie, it would be difficult to draw any qualitative distinction between the role attributed to the applicant and Mithileshdevi A. Mishra. I am, therefore, inclined to grant prearrest bail to the applicant as well. 6.

Hence, the following order:-

ORDER

(i) In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with C.R. No. 261 of 2022, registered with Kapurbawdi Police Station, Thane for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the applicant be released on bail on executing a PR Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and attend Kapurbawadi Police Station as and when directed by the Investigating Officer.

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or give threat or inducement to the first informant and any of the persons acquainted with the facts of the case.

(iv) It is clarified that these prima facie observations are confined to determine the entitlement to pre-arrest bail only. (v) The application stands disposed.

(N. J. JAMADAR, J.)