IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 152 OF 2008 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 119 OF 2008 Manohar Kisan Jadhav & Ors. ...... ......Applicants. V/s State of Maharashtra .. ...... ......Respondent. Mr.M.S.Karnik, Adv. For the applicants. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, APP For the respondent. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 16/2/08 PC: Heard learned advocate for the applicant on bail application. The present applicant Manohar is son of applicant No.2- Latabai who happens to be sister of the deceased by name Bhagwan whereas applicant No.3 is the brother-in-law of the deceased. Bhagwan committed suicide and left behind a note blaming the present applicants for the act of suicide that he committed. The note was written just prior to the death. The case of the prosecution is that the applicant No.2-Latabai sister of the deceased had purchased a car to be run as taxi by Bhagwan so that he can earn some income to maintain himself. The deceased was also provided a rental accommodation by the applicant Nos. 1 and 2. As Bhagwan did not pay the installments as demanded by the applicants they are said to have taken back possession of the 1 vehicle and thrown the deceased out of rental premises. Because of harassment on the part of present applicants, according to the prosecution, Bhagwan committed suicide and the applicants are guilty of abating the same. The case of the present applicants is that they have tried to help the deceased despite his addiction to liquor. The evidence of P.W.1 throws light on the character and financial position of the deceased. P.W.1 admits that the deceased was very much addicted to consumption of alcohol and was financially broken. In the first place the submission is that taking back the possession of vehicle on account of non payment of installments and asking the deceased to vacate the rental premises cannot be termed as an act of abating commission of offence of suicide. Perused the judgment. The applicants have been convicted for offence punishable under section 306 and have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years. The applicants were on bail during the trial and have not misused the liberty. In my opinion, this is a fit case for grant of bail. Appeal filed by the applicants is not likely to come up for final hearing prior to expiry of period of sentence. Hence I direct that the applicants be released on bail on the same terms and conditions on which they were so released during the trial on executing fresh bail bonds. Application stands disposed of. 16.2.08 2