1 Cri.Appln. 3305.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3305 OF 2011 in CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 393 OF 2011 Sau. Vajabai Vikram Sonwane & another APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ..... Shri Joydeep Chatterji, Advocate for the applicants Shri B.J. Sonwane, APP for the respondent /State. ..... CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 9 th September, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. Perused application and the record. 2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, convicted the applicants / accused and their son, Santosh of the offences punishable under Sections 306, 498-A read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced each of them to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for six and three years on respective counts and pay total fine of Rs. 3,000/-, in Sessions Case No. 58/2007. The other co-accused in the said case, the relations of 2 Cri.Appln. 3305.11 the applicants / accused, were acquitted. The applicants / accused and their son Santosh were acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 304-B read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. Santosh and the deceased Sangita sister of the complainant PW-1 Mahendra Baviskar, were married on 26-12-2005 at village Gondegaon, Tq. Soygaon, District Aurangabad, and Sangita after the marriage joined her husband at the matrimonial home at Village Gondegaon. She was staying in joint family comprising of her husband Santosh, the applicants / accused and the accused No. 3 Sanjay, younger brother of Santosh. 4. Santosh is educated up to B.A. and was without any job. His brother Sanjay was also in search of job, and he was married soon after the marriage of Santosh, to accused No. 4 Surekha. These are iundisputed facts. 5. It is the case of the prosecution, that Sangita was subjected to physical and mental cruelty for the purpose of extracting Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One lakh) from her parents as funds to buy a job for her husband Santosh. At the material time, Sangita 3 Cri.Appln. 3305.11 was pregnant and she had been requesting her parents to arrange for the money demanded by her in-laws so as to get a freedom from their harassment. According to the prosecution, the deceased -Sangita could arrange Rs. 50,000/- and had paid the said amount to the applicant / accused No. 10-Vikram father of the accused No. 1-Santosh. 6. On 08-01-2007 at around 4.00 p.m. the prosecution reveals, the accused No. 1 Santosh telephoned the complainant and apprised him of the quarrel which was going on between Sangita on one hand and the Accused No. 4-Surekha and accused No. 5-Shashikala on the other, at the matrimonial home, and Sangita had expressed her desire to return to her parents. On the same day at around 7.15 p.m. Santita requested her father on phone that it was difficult for her to live in matrimonial home. Therefore, she requested them to take her in any condition to Village Marwad as early as possible. On the same day at about 12.00 midnight, the applicant / accused -Vikram Sonwane telephonically informed the complainant that Sangita had left house at around 10.00 p.m. to answer nature’s call and did not return back. However, he did not lodge any missing report. The complainant, accompanied by his friend Kiran Hari Kumawat on the said night, came to the matrimonial home of the deceased- 4 Cri.Appln. 3305.11 Sangita and nobody was found in the house of the accused and the matrimonial home of the Sangita was found locked. Thereafter, the complainant and his friend searched Sangita in adjacent area but she could not be found, and ultimately the complainant lodged a missing report with Pachora Police Station on 09-01-2007. 7. At about 12.00 noon on 10-01-2007, the dead body of Sangita was found floating in one old well situated near Reliance Petrol Pump, Pachora. Postmortem examination conducted on her body confirmed that Sangita died due to drowning. The complainant thereafter, lodged a complaint on 10-01-2007 with Pachora Police Station. A crime was registered at Crime No. 6/2007 under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 323 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and under Sections 4 & 5 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. In due course the investigation was completed and the charge sheet was filed. 8. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon framed charges under Sections 498-A, 306, 304-B read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 after the committal of the case. 5 Cri.Appln. 3305.11 9. The prosecution examined seven witnesses including PW-3 Sahebrao, father of the deceased, and PW-6 Prabhakar, brother of the deceased. In defence, the accused examined Dr.Dilip Mahajan to place before the trial Court the fact of mental illness of the accused No. 1-Santosh. 10. The learned Advocate Shri Chatterji for the applicants / accused, submitted that the allegations of cruelty are vague and made generally against all the accused. In his view, there could be many reasons to commit suicide, and the evidence of Dr. Dilip Mahajan disclosed one such compelling reason i.e. mental illness of the accused No. 1- Santosh-husband of the deceased-Sangita. These facts are found revealed in the evidence. He further submitted that the prosecution case is weird and applicants deserve to be released on bail, particularly when they had enjoyed bail during the trial and they have been awarded short term sentence. 11. The learned APP Shri Sonwane for the respondent / State, submitted that there was clear cut evidence of the demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One lakh), emerging through testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, and the conduct of the applicant / accused No. 10-Vikram, a Ex-Police Officer, was reprehensible not only for 6 Cri.Appln. 3305.11 the demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One lakh) from the parents of the deceased-Sangita but also for not taking steps after the deceased-Sangita had gone missing. 12. It is true that the evidence of DW-1 Dilip Mahajan disclosed the fact of mental illness of accused No. 1-Santosh and counseling of both Santosh and his wife deceased-Sangita by him at his hospital. However, nowhere in the evidence one come across a fact that the deceased-Sangita had ever made grievance about the mental illness of the accused No. 1 Santosh. The bottom line in the prosecution case has been the demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One lakh) by accused No. 1-Santosh and his father Accused No. 10-Vikram. There is sufficient evidence to draw this bottom line. Prima facie, therefore, clear evidence of demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One lakh) by accused No. 10- Vikram surfaces. As regards the applicant No. 1/ Accused No. 2- Vajabai Vikram Sonwane, is concerned there is a general allegation of being party to the demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One lakh). 8. Considering these facts and circumstances, the application of applicant No. 1/ Accused No. 2- Vajabai Vikram Sonwane deserves to be allowed, and so far as the applicant No. 7 Cri.Appln. 3305.11 2 / accused No. 10- Vikram Namdev Sonwane is concerned his application deserves to be rejected. ORDER [i] The applicant No.1 /Accused No. 2-Vajabai Viram Sonwane, be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) with one or more surety in the like amount. [ii} The application of the applicant No. 2/ accused No. 10- Vikram Namdev Sonwane stands rejected. [iii] Criminal Application No. 3305/2011 stands disposed off accordingly. ( U.D. SALVI, J. ) SDM* September-11