Ramchandra Uttam Malkampatte v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1154 OF 2025 Ramchandra Uttam Malkampatte ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Respondents
Mr. Angad Singh Gill a/w. Ms. Janaki Patil and Mr. Nilesh Salvi, for the Applicant.
Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Ratan L. Adhe a/w. Mr. Tulshiram Kale, for the Respondent No.2.
Ms. Hasina Shaikh, PSI, Chikhali Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad, Pune.
CORAM:
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED :
8th OCTOBER 2025 PC:- 1.
Heard Mr. Gill, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants and Ms. Yadav, learned APP appearing for the Respondent No.1State. 2.
By the present Application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS"), the Applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 598 of 2024 registered with Chikhali Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, Pune,
on 07th October 2024 under Sections 306, 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC"). 3.
The FIR is lodged by the brother of the deceased. As per the prosecution case, the deceased got married with the Applicant on 1st May 2013. After few years of marriage the Applicant started harassing the deceased inter alia on the ground that she was not able to conceive and also that the Applicant started demanding huge amount from deceased for purchasing property. In February 2024, the deceased came to know that the Applicant is having an extra- marital affair. Therefore, the deceased committed suicide on 26th March 2024.
4.
It is submitted by Mr. Gill, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant that the FIR has been lodged on 7th October 2024, although, the deceased died by suicide on 26th March 2024. There is a delay of about 6 1/2 months in filing the FIR. He therefore submitted that pre-arrest bail be granted.
5.
On the other hand, Ms. Yadav, learned APP appearing for the Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Adhe, learned Counsel appearing
for the Respondent No.2 strongly opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application. It is submitted that the material on record show that the applicant is involved in the crime and therefore, application seeking pre-arrest bail be rejected.
6.
The allegation in the FIR shows that the accused were harassing the deceased on the ground that she was unable to conceive and other allegation is that for purchase of land, money was demanded and that the Applicant who is the husband of the deceased was having relationship outside of marriage. 7.
Perusal of the record shows that a learned Single Judge by detailed order dated 16th May 2025 has granted interim protection. The said protection is in operation till today. 8.
Ms. Yadav, learned APP, on instructions, states that the chargesheet is ready and the same will be filed shortly in the Court. Thus the investigation is completed.
9.
In the facts and circumstances, case is made out for grant of Anticipatory Bail.
10.
Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed in terms of the order dated 16th May 2025 passed by the learned Single Judge.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Digitally signed by SONALI MILIND PATIL Date:
2025.10.11 14:42:26 +0530 SONALI MILIND PATIL