Swati Chentan More v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 663 OF 2026 Swati C. More ...Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent.

..............

Mr. Chaitanya C. Mulawkar, Mr. Harish Garde, Mr. Amol Shelke for the Applicant.

Ms S.M. Yadav, APP for the Respondent/State.

Mr. Advait U. Shukla for the First Informant/Intervener. PSI Amol Ghodke, Chandannagar Police Station, Pune City is present.

..............

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

01.04.2026.

P.C. :

1.

Mentioned out of turn.

2.

This is an application for anticipatory bail. 3.

The applicant is apprehending her arrest in Crime No. 283 of 2025 registered at Chandannagar Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 82(1) and 308(7) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 4.

The deceased was the husband of the present applicant. It is alleged that the applicant without obtaining divorce from the deceased married to co-accused Chetan More. It is alleged that she thereafter on one pretext or the other extracted Rs.15,18,100/- and when the deceased told her to return the said amount, she threatened him to implicate in false rape case. It is 1/3

alleged that due to constant harassment caused by the applicant and the co-accused Chetan More on 22nd June 2025, the deceased committed suicide by hanging himself.

5.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, the learned APP for the respondent/State and the learned counsel for the first informant/intervener.

6.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is a delay of more than one month in lodging the FIR. It is submitted that afterthought allegations are made against the applicant. It is submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation.

7.

On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State and learned counsel for the first informant submit that the present applicant was harassing the deceased and there are statements of the witnesses to that effect. It is submitted that there is also a video clip collected by the Investigating Officer which shows that the present applicant was harassing the deceased when he asked her to return his money. It is submitted that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail. 8.

I have perused the FIR. There appears to be delay of more than one month in lodging the FIR. Prima-facie, from the allegations, it is difficult to draw an inference that the harassment was to such an extent that there was no option for the deceased except to commit suicide. In that view of the matter, I am inclined 2/3

to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. In the result, the following order is passed.

ORDER

A) The Application is allowed.

B) In the event of arrest of the applicant in C.R. No.283 of 2025 registered at Chandannagar Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 82(1) and 308(7) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, she be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety or two sureties in the like amount.

C) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall cooperate in the investigation.

[N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3