1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 219 of 2010 [Dayaram B. Gadge & another Vs. State of Mah.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. A.M. Ghare, Adv., for the applicants. Mr. V.A. Thakre, APP for respondent. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 01st April, 2010. 1. This is an application for bail by husband and father-in-law of deceased. 2. Applicants are named as accused in Crime No. 91/09 for offences under Sections 498- A, 304-B, read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered with Police Station, Ural, Distt. Akola. 3. The applicants have prayed for bail on the ground of parity, urging that other accused persons totalling five in number have been released on bail. 4. Copies of orders granting bail to these five persons by Sessions Court are placed on record. 5. Heard learned Adv. Mr. A.M. Ghare for 2 the applicants and learned APP Mr. V.A. Thakre for the respondent. 6. Perused the affidavit of the Investigating Officer and the Case Diary. 7. Perusal of orders passed by Sessions Court and record discloses that the applicants are not entitled to claim bail on the ground of parity. Those who are released on bail are brothers-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in- law. 8. It is revealing from evidence collected by the prosecution that the deceased and her husband were staying with father-in-law and mother-in-law. Brothers-in-law were staying separately. The allegation of demand of dowry and ill-treatment based thereon is against the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law. 9. Case of mother-in-law stood on a different footing being a woman accused and over sixty years of age. 10. Present applicants, against whom there is a direct evidence, are prima facie involved in commission of offence and they are not entitled to be released on bail. 11. In the result, application is rejected. 3 Judge |Hedau|