... 1 ... IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5929 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5929 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5929 OF 2005 Shri. Pramod Attmaram Mohite ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Shri. C.K. Pendse for the Applicant. Ms S. D. Shinde, A.P.P. for the Respondent. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 14, 2005. DATE : SEPTEMBER 14, 2005. DATE : SEPTEMBER 14, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the Advocate appearing for the Applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The offence alleged against the Applicant is under sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The Advocate for the Applicant submitted that even assuming that the deceased committed suicide, the main reason for committing suicide appears to be constant illtreatment to the deceased at the place of her employment. Reliance is placed on the correspondence which is annexed to this Application. He submitted that the father and brother of the deceased had no grievance about the conduct of the Applicant. He submitted that the entire prosecution case is apparently false and therefore, the Applicant is entitled to protection. 3. The learned A.P.P. has placed for my perusal relevant material collected during the investigation. ... 2 ... 4. I have considered the submissions. Perusal of the investigation papers shows that number of statements have been recorded by the police. The statements are of relatives of the deceased, neighbour and other persons. The marriage between the Applicant and the deceased has taken place in the year 2000 and she has committed suicide by jumping into the river in the year 2005. 5. Considering the material collected during the course of investigation, it is obvious that the allegations against the Applicant are of grave nature requiring custodial interrogation. No case is made out for grant of Anticipatory Bail. Application is rejected. At this stage the Advocate for the Applicant states that the Applicant is willing to surrender before the Investigating Officer and he may be granted short time. The said prayer is opposed by the learned A.P.P. Considering the facts and circumstances, time is granted to the Applicant to surrender before the Investigating Officer till 16th September, 2005. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE