Mohan Rameshwar Sadanshiv v. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso, Ps Mouda(Rural), Dist. Nagpur
2025:BHC-NAG:4642
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.241 OF 2025 (Mohan Rameshwar Sadanshiv 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. M.P. Kariya, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. A.M. Ghogare, APP for the State.
CORAM:- URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED :- APRIL 25, 2025.
Apprehending the arrest at the hands of police in connection with Crime No.218/2025 registered with Police Station Mouda, District Nagpur for the offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the applicant approached this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail.
2.
The applicant is serving in SRPF since 2014 and the marriage of the deceased along with the present applicant was performed in the year 2019. As per the allegations in the FIR lodged by the brother of the deceased, that after marriage, the present applicant was suspecting her character and was assaulting her. She was physically and mentally tortured by the present applicant and being fed up with the same, she has committed suicide. On the basis of the said report, police have registered the crime against the present applicant.
3.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that after 2022 there was no allegation as to the harassment at the hands of the present applicant. He submitted that, as far as the custodial interrogation of the applicant is concerned, which is not required as nothing is to be recovered from the present applicant. He submitted that the general allegations are levelled against the present applicant and which are not sufficient to infer that there was an abetment at the hands of the present applicant. In view of that, the applicant be released on anticipatory bail.
4.
Learned APP strongly opposed the application and invited my attention towards the letter, which is issued by the deceased to her parents and submitted that there is a specific allegation against the present applicant that she is not physically, but mentally harassed by the present applicant. He submitted that the custodial interrogation of the present applicant is required. Considering the nature of the offence, the application deserves to be rejected.
5.
I have heard learned Counsel for both the sides and on perusal of the investigation papers it reveals that the marriage of the applicant with the deceased performed in the year 2019. Thereafter, she resumed cohabitation at the hands of the present applicant. The applicant and the deceased were not having any issue and as per the allegation, she was not allowed to talk with her
family members i.e. father, brother, or any other relatives. It is further alleged that she was assaulted to the extent by fist and kick blows that she could not control her natural activities also due to the said assault. Thus, considering the nature of the allegation levelled against the present applicant, which is sufficient to infer that due to the abetment at the hands of the present applicant, the deceased has committed suicide.
6.
On perusal of the investigation papers and on hearing the learned APP there is a substance in the submission made by the learned APP. Considering the nature of the allegations levelled against the present applicant, the offence of abetment is prima face made out, and therefore, I am not inclined to consider the prayer of the present applicant for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the application deserves to be rejected.
7.
Hence, the application is rejected accordingly. (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) *Divya