1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4259 OF 2010 Kailash S/o Kushaba Thokale Age : 38 years, Occ : Service, R/o Dnyandip Society, Shiv Shakti Apartment, B-3, Kirwali, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Raigad. ..APPLICANT -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT ......... Mr. N.B. Narwade, advocate for applicant. Mr. N.H. Borade, A.P.P. for respondent. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 19 th November, 2010. PER COURT : 1. The application is for anticipatory bail. 2. The applicant is the Assistant Teacher and is attached to a school situated at Bhadwal, Tq. Karjat, (District Raigad). The marriage between deceased Aruna and the applicant was performed on 20th May, 2001. She was residing with the applicant till before about 9 months prior to the incident of her death. The F.I.R. is lodged by her brother. It is alleged that deceased Aruna was subjected to matrimonial cruelty. It is further alleged that applicant used to suspect her credibility and had sent Aruna to 2 maternal home on three to four occasions. Her parents reside at Rahuri (District Ahmednagar). 3. Having heard the learned Advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P., and on perusal of the investigation papers, it appears that during the period of about 9 years after the marriage there was no complaint lodged by deceased Aruna or her relatives about the alleged matrimonial cruelty. The deceased has left eight years male child. There are general allegations about the matrimonial cruelty. The case of the applicant, however, is that deceased Aruna was mentally disturbed and was being treated by Psychiatric. 4. There is no dispute about the fact that on 29.09.2010 at about 2.30 a.m. Aruna set herself on fire while she was residing with her parents. As stated before, since about nine months before the incident, she was residing with her parents, it is, prima facie, difficult to infer that while she was residing with her parents, the applicant subjected her to matrimonial cruelty. Since, the death did not occur within the period of seven years after the marriage, the presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act is also not attracted. 3 5. Considering the peculiar fact situation obtained in the present case, the applicant's arrest may not be required for the purpose of investigation. He is likely to be humiliated and put to harassment due to his arrest. It would suffice if his cooperation during the investigation is ensured by putting certain conditions. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- ( Rupees twenty thousand), in the event of his arrest, before the Arresting Officer and on condition that on each Sunday he shall attend the concerned Police Station and shall co- operate with the I.O., by attending the investigation between 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. for six consecutive Sundays or till filing of the charge sheet. He shall not make any attempt to contact any of the witnesses or tamper with the evidence. His failure to attend the Police Station and co-operate with the Investigating Officer may entail withdrawal of the liberty granted by this Court. The application is disposed of accordingly. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/cri4259.10