1 CRI.APP.NO. 2212/2009. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2212 OF 2009. 1. Kailas Shriram Bhadange. 2. Shriram Deoram Bhadange. 3. Suman @ Nawsabai Shriram Bhadange. ...Applicants. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra & another. ...Respondents. .... Mr.K.S.Bhore,Advocate for the applicant. Mrs.R.R.Mane,APP for the respondents. .... CORAM: A.V.NIRGUDE, J. DATE : 14th July, 2009. COURT’S ORDER: 1. Mr.Bhore, learned Advocate for the applicant No. 1-Kailash, withdraws the application since during the pendency of this case, the applicant No.1 was arrested and was released on regular bail. Therefore, the application in respect of applicant No.1- Kailash is dismissed as withdrawn. 2 CRI.APP.NO. 2212/2009. 2. The application is pressed only for the purpose of applicant Nos.2 and 3, who are the parents of the applicant No.1. The applicants are accused of committing offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 313, 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The complainant is the applicant No.1's estranged wife. She said, she got married to the applicant No.1 in May, 2007. She said, after she delivered girl child, her husband and the present applicant started telling her that the applicant No. 1 was worth Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs.Five Lakhs ) as a bridegroom and she should, therefore, at least bring Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.Two Lakhs) from her parents. On this demand they started harassing her. On many occasion, the applicants No.2 and 3 had occasion to harass and physically assault her. In April, 2009, the complainant found that she was pregnant again. The applicants demanded that she should terminate the pregnancy because they suspected that it was a girl child again. The complainant further alleged that on 14th April, 2009, the applicant took her to hospital on the pretext that they would mend her tooth. She said, the Doctor administered her anesthesia. She said, after she came back, she realised that Doctor had terminated her pregnancy. 4. The complainant thereafter came back home and 3 CRI.APP.NO. 2212/2009. from there she went back to her parents house. The complaint came to be filed on 18th of April, 2009. As said above, the complaint contains several allegations in respect of several incidents that took place when the complainant was staying in the house of the present applicants. The complainant, specifically asserted that while she was staying with the applicants on several occasions, her husband caused bleeding injuries to her in presence of his parents, the applicant Nos.2 and 3. There is allegations against the present applicant that they too treated the complainant with cruelty. There are allegations that while the complainant's father and other relative had come to the applicants house, the applicants called bullies of the locality to deter the complainant's father from taking away the complainant & they prevented the complainant from going with her father. It is clear that it is not only the applicant No.1 the husband of the complainant who treated her with cruelty but the applicants No.2 and 3 were also supporting him and they had their tacit consent for the cruelty and the harassment. The applicant Nos. 2 and 3 do not deserve any sympathy and can not get anticipatory bail. Their application stands dismissed. (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) lkp