1 ba 1342 of 2011 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1342 OF 2011 Javed Gulshan Khan .. Applicant. -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. Mahesh Vaswani with Sana Bangwala i/b Suhail Shariff, for the applicant. Mrs. A. A. Mane, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 26th September, 2011 P.C. 1. This is an application for bail by second husband of the victim who has been arrested and chargesheeted for having committed her murder. The victim had married one Kunal Parekh possibly against her wish and was divorced by decree of divorce dated 28th April, 2010, passed by the Family Court at Bandra. Thereafter she seems to have married the applicant who is Muslim, by converting to herself to Islam. There was a child of the earlier marriage, who was left in the custody of first husband, by the decree of divorce. The victim wanted the custody of child to be with her. The applicant 2 ba 1342 of 2011 seems to have told the victim that after obtaining premises at Dahisar, they may apply for custody of the child whereas the victim was insisting for applying for custody immediately and was not ready to wait till they moved to Dahisar premises. This was the possibly the reason for bickerings between the two. 2. On the night of 15th November, 2010, the victim went to the bedroom and hanged herself by her ‘odhani’ by tying it to a ceiling fan after closing the door from inside. The applicant broke open the door with the help of neighbours, carried the victim to Cardinal Greases Hospital, Vasai at 4.30 a.m. She was pronounced dead by the hospital authorities, who also informed the police. Inquest was performed as also panchnama of spot. The body was taken to Bhagwati Hospital at Borivali at the instance of victim’s father for postmortem. But since Bhagwati Hospital refused to conduct the postmortem, ultimately it was taken to Primary Health Centre at Navghar, Taluka: Vasai, District: Thane; where postmortem was conducted on 18.11.2010. The copy of postmortem notes annexed to the application as well as those made available for my perusal by the learned APP, are not the same. The injuries described in column No.17 in the two notes of postmortem examination are as under. 3 ba 1342 of 2011 Injuries described in column No.17 of the copy of postmortem annexed to application injuries described in the column No .17 of postmortem copy of which made available by learned APP i) Bruise with abrasion over left side of neck – two in numbers One at sub mandibular and one at the left side of glottis. both are vertical in direction, cresentic shape 3 x 5 each. Brownish colo. ii) Abrasion with bruise over right side of the neck on glottis 8x3 cresentic shape, brown colour. iii) There is contusion below the skin below the above injures. iv) Internal injuries over glottis and trachial are noted in column No.20 i)Contusion with bruise over left side of the neck, two in number. One at sub mandibular region and one at the left side of the glottis. Both are vertical in direction cresentic shape 3 x 5 mm each. Brownish colour. ii) Contusion with bruise over right side of the neck on glottis 8 x 3 mm, cresentic shape brownish colour. iii) There is contusion below the skin below the above injuries. iv) Glottis and trachial internal injuries are noted in column NO.20. 3. It is strange that the Medical Officers have chosen to add words in the postmortem notes after possibly a copy was prepared, signed and delivered by them to the police who gave it to the applicant. There cannot be question of applicant’s having tampered with the copy because it is not that any words are added in the copy produced by the applicant. The word ‘contusion’ in the injury no (i) and (ii) is missing in the copy provided to the applicant. Further it is not clear as to how the Medical Officers came to conclusion that the injuries are indicative of asphyxia due to throttling. The injuries which have been observed could also have occurred due to hanging. Considering the genesis of the incident, the 4 ba 1342 of 2011 observations made in the panchnama of spot as well as discrepancy in description of injuries which have been just referred to and the fact that the chargesheet has been filed, detaining the applicant in custody pending trial may not be necessary, since he is permanent resident of Mumbai. Application is allowed. The applicant, arrested in C.R.No.I-596 of 2010, registered at Nalasopara Police Station, District:Thane, be released on bail on his furnishing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the sum aggregating to Rs.50,000/-. 3. Application stands disposed of. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)