1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) No. 211/2011 (Sau. Pushpa Dinanath Bhagat .vs. State of Mah. Through PSO PS Hudkeshwar, Nagpur. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. R.R. Vyas, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S.B. Ahirkar, APP for Respondent. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : APRIL 25, 2011 Heard. The learned APP has opted to argue the application without filing the say in view of the charge sheet being filed in the matter. The prayer for bail made by one of the accused charge sheeted by Hudkeshwar Police Station as a result of investigation of Crime No. 128/2010 registered on 16.9.2010 for offence under Sections 302, 201 read with 34 of IPC is vehemently objected by the prosecution on the grounds of the material collected during the investigation containing circumstances prima facie leading to the inference of the guilt of the applicant for the offences for which she is charge sheeted. The said offence has been registered upon the 2 FIR lodged by mother Shobhabai of deceased Manisha. The material part of the FIR reveals that the deceased along with first informant were residing on rent in the house of the applicant and the applicant and her daughter were behind them for vacating the said flat. The reports were lodged at Hudkeshwar Police Station regarding the threatening given by the applicant and her daughter to first informant and her daughter for vacating the said house. It further depicts that on 16.9.2010 at about 8 a.m. the applicant and her daughter had a quarrel with the first informant and her daughter. The first informant had thereafter left for a job at Cotton Market with the deceased at said flat. She had returned at about 7.25 p.m. and found that the door of the flat though closed was not locked. As she was unable to find her daughter Manisha, she gave a call on her mobile bearing number 9763986145 but found that the same was switched off. The first informant had thereafter found the corpse of her daughter in a blue colour plastic drum kept in the middle room of the flat with drum covered by means of bed-sheet. The first informant thereafter lodged such report and the Police came to the said spot and had taken out the corpse which was found injuries on the head and with hands and legs tied entangled with the neck by means of Oodhani. After the investigation of crime, the applicant along with her daughter has been charge sheeted. The perusal of the material in the case diary though supports the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no eye witness to the 3 crime, still it is difficult to accept his further submission that there exists no material in the charge sheet connecting the applicant with the crime. The same is apparent as the material in the charge sheet reveals that as a sequel of the statement leading to the discovery made by the daughter of the applicant on 18.9.2010, the police had seized a mobile phone and blood stood clothes from the house of the applicant. Similarly as a sequel of the statement leading to the discovery made by the applicant, the blood stained clothes has been discovered and seized from the same house. Though learned counsel for the applicant urged that CA report being yet to be received regarding the seized articles, the description mentioned in the relevant panchanama is only wild inference drawn by the I.O. that the said articles are stained with the blood. It is difficult to accept the said submission at the present interim stage. At any rate the said record collected during the course of the investigation is prima facie suggestive of the said articles being stained with the blood. Needless to add that no explanation regarding such articles being found in the house of the applicant has been given either in the application for bail or advanced during the oral submissions. Having regard to the same and close proximity between the event of finding of such articles and date on which crime has taken place considered along with probable motive for applicant to commit crime, prima facie there appears substance in the submission of the learned APP of same being capable of prime facie establishing the 4 involvement of the applicant in the offence for which she is charge sheeted. In view of the same, there are no merits in the application. The application stands rejected. However, liberty to the applicant to renew the prayer for bail after the receipt of the C.A. report. JUDGE halwai