Sau Dhuri Tukaram Jadhav v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Pso Khandala Tq Pusad Dist Yavatmal
2024:BHC-NAG:9016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 450 OF 2024 Dhuri Tukaram Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Mr. K.S. Narwade, counsel for the applicant.
Mr. C.A. Lokhande, APP for non-applicant/State. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : 13/08/ 4.
1.
The present application is for grant of pre-arrest bail, in connection with Crime No. 114/2024 registered with Police Station Khandala, District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2.
The applicant is the mother-in-law and arraigned as an accused on the basis of report lodged by Devichanda Sewa Ade, father of the deceased, on an allegation that marriage of his daughter was performed with the coaccused, and after marriage she resumed the cohabitation, but she was treated well by the co-accused as well as the present applicant. She was ill-treated for the demand of Rs. 50,000/-, due to which, she has committed suicide. 3.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted now the father-in-law is also released by this Court on a regular bail. As far as the allegation against the present applicant is concerned, which are general in nature. Her custodial
interrogation is not required. He submitted that the investigation officer has recorded relevant statement of the witnesses, from which also, it reveals that the general statement is made against the present applicant. In view of that, interim protection granted to the present applicant deserves to be confirmed.
4.
Learned APP strongly opposed the said application and submitted that when she was residing in the matrimonial house, she was continuously ill-treated by the present applicant and other co-accused, due to which she has committed suicide.
5.
He further submitted that though the applicant was directed to attend the concerned police as and when required. After issuance of the notice also, she has not attended the concerned police station and not cooperated with the investigating agency. In view of that, application deserves to be rejected.
6.
Perused the FIR as well as the investigation paper, from which it reveals that the informant as well as other witnesses have attributed the role of the present applicant. As to the abetment is concerned, general allegations appears to be made against the present applicant. As far as the father-in-law is concerned, who is already released on bail, admittedly, the applicant has to attend the concerned police station whenever she was called by the investigation officer. Considering her custodial interrogation is not required, the interim protection granted to the applicant deserves to be
confirmed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order;
a] The criminal application is allowed.
b] In the event of arrest, in connection with Crime No. 114/2024 registered with Police Station Khandala, District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the applicant- Dhuri Tukaram Jadhav shall be released on anticipatory bail, on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount.
c] The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required for the investigation purpose.
d] It is made clear that whenever the presence of the applicant is necessary, she shall be served with 24 our prior notice.
e] The applicant shall not induce, threat or promise any witnesses who are acquainted with the facts of the case.
The criminal application stands disposed of.
[URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.] Signed by: Mr. R.K. NANDURKAR Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 14/08/2024 18:49:40