{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2093 OF 2010 1. Haridas s/o Jairam Kedari Age-54 years, Occ-Agri 2. Bhausaheb s/o Kisan Wadge Age-30 years, Occ-Service 3. Mahesh s/o Haridas Kedari Age-24 years, Occ-Agri 4. Ganesh s/o Haridas Kediar Age-26 years, Occ-Service All R/o Mirajgaon, Tq-Karjat Dist-Ahmednagar APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for the applicants Mrs. V.A.Shinde, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 14th June 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicants have prayed {2} to release them on bail in connection with CR No.89/2010 registered with Karjat police station for an offence punishable u/s 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by learned APP. Also perused the papers of investigation. 3. It appears that the said offence is registered on the complaint of one Dilip Hiwale, father of deceased Devidas. It is alleged in the complaint that while the daughter of applicant No.1 was prosecuting her studies at Mirajgaon, she had love affair with the deceased and hence his son is murdered by the applicants. 4. Admittedly, marriage of the daughter of applicant No.1 was scheduled on 22nd May 2010 for which a hall "Phule Ambedkar Smarak" owned and managed by Gram Panchayat, Mirajgaon, was booked. In the early hours of 20th May 2010, sweeper, while he was cleaning the said hall, found the dead body of the deceased in hanging condition to the ceiling in the room which is specifically provided to brides. Initially, ADR was registered and after receipt of report in respect of cause of death, the present complaint came to be registered and the applicants came to be arrested. 5. The cause of death, as opined by medical expert, is auspexia due to hanging. Whereas, as per the complaint, the {3} deceased was first smothered and then his dead body was hanged in the said room. So far as theory of smothering is concerned the same has been ruled out by the medical opinion. 6. The applicants were called for inquiry in the ADR and came to be arrested. The place where the alleged incident has taken place play a very vital role. As it is a hall particularly provided for brides. In the premise, it cannot be said that the said hall was kept idle without watchman or security guard during night hours. Considering the scenario it is clear that the incident might have been occurred between the night of 19th and 20th May 2010. Had Devidas been killed outside and then his body was hanged in the said hall, then there was every possibility that the body must have been noticed by somebody. Or had he been murdered in the said hall, then there must have been signs of violence. The papers of investigation do not disclose that the deceased was in the company of the applicants at the relevant time. Only one witness has stated that in the relevant night he had seen applicant No.3 in a drunken condition, which itself is not a sufficient evidence to link the applicants with the death of the deceased. In the premise, though the investigation is in progress, yet considering the peculiar circumstance, the applicants deserve liberty, however on certain conditions. 7. In the result, the application is allowed. All the applicants be released on bail in connection with CR No.89/2010 {4} registered with Karjat police station on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each and on executing PR bonds in the like amount. The applicants are directed not to contact or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. The applicants are also directed to attend the Karjat police station on each Monday between 10.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2093-10