IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 986 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 986 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 986 OF 2008 (For Bail) Abasaheb Mahadeo Lokhande ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent. Mr C. S. Joshi, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr S. R. Shinde, Advocate for the State. CORAM: V.C. DAGA,J. CORAM: V.C. DAGA,J. CORAM: V.C. DAGA,J. DATED: 05.05.2008. DATED: 05.05.2008. DATED: 05.05.2008. P P P.C. C. C. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. Perused the application and the material available on record. FACTS: FACTS: FACTS: ----- ----- ----- 3. By this application, the applicant-accused is seeking bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in C.R.No. 124 / 2007 registered with Vaduj Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 306, 504, 506 read with section 34 of ( 2 ) the Indian Penal Code. 4. After having suffered adverse order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satara, the applicant has moved the present application. During the course of hearing, the learned A.P.P. has filed affidavit making statement on oath that the Sessions Case is taken up for hearing and kept for recording of witnesses on 6.5.2008 in the Trial Court and on that date material witnesses would be examined. The statement made by the learned A.P.P. is not disputed by the learned counsel for the applicant. Inspite of this the learned counsel for the applicant insisted for hearing and the decision on the application. Hence, consideration of the application on merits. CONSIDERATION: CONSIDERATION: CONSIDERATION: ------------- ------------- ------------- 5. It is not in dispute that the wife of the applicant was missing from 15.9.2007. The applicant did not lodge any police complaint though he states that he made enquiries with his relatives. As a matter of fact, inspite of making enquiries with the ( 3 ) relatives, she could not be traced out for two nights. In this peculiar circumstance, one would expect the applicant -husband to lodge police report. The applicant-accused maintained silence for two nights. He, ultimately, lodged a report on 18.9.2007, when her dead body was surfaced in a well. The conduct of the applicant cannot be said to be natural. Considering facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the trial has already commenced, this is not a fit case for grant of bail at this stage. 6. In the result, the application stands rejected. 7. Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. (V.C.AGA,J) (V.C.AGA,J) (V.C.AGA,J)