1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3846 OF 2009 Tulshidas S/o.Chagan Awasare, Age-22 years, Occu-Labourer, R/o.Rajmata, Jijau Nagar, Mukundwadi, Railway Station, Aurangabad APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Mukundwadi, Dist. Aurangabad RESPONDENT Mr.M.P.Gude, learned counsel for the applicant. Mrs.Y.M.Kshisagar, learned APP for respondent. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 01/12/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on bail in connection with CR No.258/2009, registered in Mukundwadi Police Station of District : Aurangabad for an offence punishable u/s. 304-B, 314, 498-A, 323, 504 r/w. 34 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. Papers of 2 investigation till carried out are placed before me for my perusal. 3. It appears from the perusal of the papers of investigation that the said complaint came to be lodged on 04/09/2009 on the complaint of one Shashikalabai Ramdas Sankpale about the demise of her daughter Suvarna Tulshidas, who was wife of present applicant. Apart from other regular allegations about the harassment to her daughter, it is alleged that as proper medical treatment was not provided to her when she was carrying 5 months pregnancy, resulted in her mis-carriage and ultimately the death of the said Suvarna occurred. Hence the complaint against applicant and others. 4. During the course of submissions across the bar, it is urged that the alleged incident occurred on 02/09/2009 of which the complaint was lodged on 04/09/2009. Applicant accused is arrested on 05/09/2009 and since then he is in custody. The investigation is almost practically over and there is no need to keep the applicant behind bars. Considering the allegations as revealed from the papers of investigation, the accused can not be held solely responsible for the demise of said Suvarna. As usual, learned APP opposed the application as according to her, as nutritious food was not provided to Suvarna which resulted in her mis-carriage and ultimately caused death and in support of it, she relied upon the statement of lady doctor, who has examined deceased Suvarna soon before her death. 3 5. Considering these submissions across the bar, it is necessary to consider what is the probable cause of death as shown in the post mortem notes. The post mortem notes clearly discloses that the death occurred due to mis-carriage and not due to starvation. 6. It is to be noted that even though this death occurred within the period of 7 years from the marriage of applicant with deceased Suvarna, it is not a case of suicidal death or it is not a case of homicidal death, but it is a case where death occurred due to mis- carriage. In the premise, whether section 304-B of IPC will be applicable is a big question mark which can be decided at the time of trial. In the premise, case made out to enlarge the applicant on bail. Hence following order - O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. Applicant be released on bail on furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and on executing PR bond in the sum of like amount. 3. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/DEC 2009/cri.appl.3846-09