1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1214 OF 2010 Shenu s/o Suryabhan Gavai ...Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and anr. ...Respondents ..... Shri R.S.Shinde, advocate holding for Shri S.P.Tiwari, advocate for the applicant Smt. Vaishali Shinde, A.P.P. for the respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 26th April, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri R.S.Shinde, advocate holding for Shri S.P.Tiwari, advocate for the applicant and Smt. Vaishali Shinde, A.P.P. for the respondents. 2 This is an application preferred by the applicant for anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest under CR No. 21 of 2010, registered at Muktainagar police station, District Jalgaon, for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498A, 323, 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the complaint lodged by the complainant, namely Sukhdeo Tukaram 2 Gavhande I.e. Father of the victim, namely Ranjana on 22.2.1010. It is alleged in the complaint that the marriage of his daughter namely Ranjana was solemnised with Balu Senu Gawai on 18.6.2009. The applicant herein is the father in law of victim Ranjana. There are allegations in respect of cruelty, illtreatment and harassment to the victim Ranjana after the marriage at the hands of her husband, her father in law i.e. applicant herein. There are also allegations of unlawful demand of Rs.20,000/- by them from deceased Ranjana to be brought by her from her parental house. Apparently, there are specific allegations against the applicant herein that he instigated in making the unlawful demand to the husband of victim Ranjana to be brought by her from her parental house. Ultimately, the said complaint discloses that Ranjana was fed up with the said mental and physical torture and therefore, committed suicide on 21.2.2010 by consuming poisonous substance. 4 On the afore said background, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that although the alleged incident occurred on 21.2.2010, the first information report came to be lodged belatedly on next day I.e. 22.2.2010 at about 9.00 p.m. It is also urged that the applicant was residing separately from Ranjana and Balu, and therefore, he is not involved in the present alleged occurrence. It is further submitted that the applicant is 65 years old and is suffering from Tuberculosis, and therefore, the application preferred by the applicant for grant of bail requires to be considered. 3 5 Learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the observations made in para 12 of the judgment, in the case of Kishangiri Mangalgiri Goswami vs State of Gujarat, reported at AIR 2009 SC 1808. However, on careful reading of the said Ruling, it is seen that the said observations are made after appreciation of the evidence in trial, but so is not the position in the instant case, since the present matter is at the stage of investigation and same has not been completed and same is under progress, and therefore said observations cannot be of any aid and assistance to the case of the applicant herein. 6 While opposing the present application, learned A.P.P. pointed out that the applicant, victim Ranjana and the husband of victim Balu were residing together. The statements of witnesses have been recorded during the course of investigation, which raise finger against the applicant herein as a perpetrator of the crime. Moreover, it is pointed out that the postmortem notes disclose the cause of death as, “asphyxia due to cardio respiratory arrest probably due to poisoning”, which is in consonance with the contents of the first information report. 7 On perusal of the investigation papers and after considering the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the respondent, it is apparent from the contents of the complaint that the name of the applicant has been reflected therein, as well as there are specific allegations against the 4 applicant as well as overt act has been attributed to the applicant therein. Moreover, it also appears from the said complaint that the applicant herein instigated the husband of victim Ranjana namely Balu in making unlawful demand of money from victim Ranjana to be brought by her from her parental house. Hence, in view of the said position, it is apparent that there is no false implication of the applicant in the offence. Moreover, custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for further progress in the investigation in proper perspective. Moreover, it is also seen from the postmortem notes that the cause of death stated therein is, “asphyxia due to cardio respiratory arrest probably due to poisoning”, which is also in consonance with the contents of the complaint. The victim Ranjana was fed up with the mental and physical torture at the hands of the applicant, her husband Balu as well as mother in law Nirmala, and therefore, victim Ranjana consumed poisonous substance and committed suicide. In the circumstances, present application bears no substance and is devoid of any merit, and hence, deserves to be rejected. 8 In the result, present Criminal Application No. 1214 of 2010 stands dismissed. Interim protection granted by this court on 8.4.2010 stands vacated. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap1214.10