ABA-501-11.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.501 OF 2011 Akash Nagnath Pandhare ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Ms. Revati Mohite-Dere for the Applicant. Mrs. A.A. Mane for the Respondent. Mr. Datta Mane for the First Informant. Mr. Vilas B. Dhaigude, PSI, Indapur Police Station, is present. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 16 TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. On 3rd May, 2011, Ashwini, wife of the Applicant, died an unnatural death. On 4th May, 2011, the First Informant, who is her maternal uncle, lodged a report with the Indapur Police Station alleging that Ashwini was being treated with cruelty by the Applicant and his relatives, i.e. mother-in-law, father-in-law and brother-in-law, and that Ashwini was, actually, murdered. On this report, a case in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302 of the IPC, 498A of the IPC read with Section 34 of the IPC has been registered ABA-501-11.sxw 2 Dixit against the Applicant and the said others. The Applicant, who is sought to be arrested, seeks anticipatory bail. 3. It is not in dispute that the Applicant is serving in the Indian Army as a 'Sepoy'. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Applicant that the Applicant was not present at all at the time of murder and that he was on duty at Almoda, Uttaranchal. I have gone through the F.I.R. and it is clear and that the Applicant was not at Indapur when death of Ashwini took place is not in dispute at all. Even, according to the First Informant, the Applicant was not present there. 4. I have specifically asked Mr. Mane, the learned Advocate for the First Informant, as to how the Applicant can be, prima facie, said to be involved in the murder of Ashwini. According to him, the F.I.R. mentions that on 2nd May, 2011, the Applicant had made about 20 to 25 mobile calls to the other accused and also to the First Informant. According to him, this shows the involvement of the Applicant in the matter. I am unable to hold that a reading of the relevant part of the F.I.R. indicates anything of that sort. It appears that the telephone calls were received in the context of the fact that the First Informant wanted to take Ashwini to his house with him. 5. It is submitted that a case of cruelty has been made out against the Applicant. However, in my opinion, if the Applicant is sought to be involved in an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC without sufficient basis, then it would be proper to protect him by grant of anticipatory bail. ABA-501-11.sxw 3 Dixit 6. The learned Advocate for the First Informant submitted that in the course of investigation, it may be revealed that the Applicant and other accused had conspired with one another and that, in that case, the Applicant can be held liable for the murder. What needs to be observed in this regard is that in such a case i.e. in the event of Investigating Agency securing some further material showing the involvement of the Applicant, appropriate application for cancellation of bail i.e. bail granted to the Applicant can be made; but on the submission that in future some material showing the involvement of the Applicant might be found, anticipatory bail cannot be denied to the Applicant, at present. 7. In the event of his arrest in C.R. No.130 of 2011 of Indapur Police Station, the Applicant be released on bail in the sum of Rs.40,000/-, with one surety in like amount, on the condition that he shall attend the Police Station everyday, between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., for a period of two weeks from tomorrow and, thereafter, as and when required by the I.O. 8. The Applicant shall not contact, meet and/or approach any of the prosecution witnesses, in any manner whatsoever, during this period. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]