1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3451/2009 (Devakabai Haridas Pawar .vs. State of Mah. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. M.P. Kariya, Advocate for Applicant Mr. A.D. Sonak, APP for Respondent. .... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 13, 2009 Heard. By the present application, one of the accused apprehending the arrest in connection with Crime No. 141/2009 of Police Station Arni, district Yavatmal registered on 28.9.2009 regarding an incident occurred on 24.9.2009 has prayed for a direction under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to the Investigating Officer that in the event of her arrest, she should be released on bail. In spite of the incident having occurred on 24.9.2009 at about 10 a.m. in which first informant/victim Aparna Kailash Pawar is said to have been administered poison after she was beaten by her husband Kailash, the crime has been registered on 28.6.2009 after recording of complaint of Aparna on said day. The registration of the crime apparently appears to have been delayed in view of the victim earlier only having expressed suspicion on her husband and the 2 present applicant for administering poison after she had become unconscious and having not explicitly accused them for commission of act. The FIR amongst other reveals that the first informant/victim had married on 27.5.2004 and returned back to the place of her father after about 4/5 months in view of herself being ill-treated by applicant and her husband for the purposes of bringing money from her father on the count of himself having given the lesser dowry. Thereafter the first informant had lodged a case against husband for maintenance in the Court and has returned to her matrimonial house in view of compromise ensued about 4/5 months from the occurrence of an incident. The material part of the FIR reveals that on the date of incident, her husband had assaulted her by giving fists and kicks blows and at at that time applicant had told her son that he should administer poison to the first informant and should kill her and had caught her hand and thereafter her husband had poured poison in her mouth and made her to drink same. The first informant is said to have been brought in an unconscious condition to the dispensary at Arni and thereafter to Yavatmal. She had reported the happenings to her sister Vidya, mother Govrabai, brother and brother-in-law. The learned counsel for the applicant has urged that having regard to advanced age of the applicant and the apparent possibility of false implication being reflected from fact of first information being lodged after a delay of about 4 days, the prayers in the application be considered. He has further urged 3 that the principal accused i.e. husband of the first informant and son of the applicant is already released on bail and as such no useful purpose would be served by not accepting the prayers in the application and on the contrary the same would only result in causing unnecessary harassment and humiliation to an old aged lady. The learned APP submitted that since the investigation is not complete, in the event of prayers in the application being accepted, the condition may be imposed for securing the presence of the applicant for the purposes of the investigation. After giving thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced and examining the case diary in light of the same, there appears substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant of apparently there being delay of 4 days in lodging FIR and there being variance in the prosecution story as reflected in the dying declaration recorded on the date of the incident and the FIR lodged after about 4 days. Needless to add that the case diary does not reveal of any steps being taken by any of the relatives of the victim for reporting the matter earliest to the Police regarding the first informant having told them in hospital about the incident having taken in a manner as claimed by her in FIR lodged subsequently. Having regard to such character of the prosecution material, the applicant has made out a case for grant of a direction as prayed. However, having regard to the investigation being said to be in progress, it will be necessary to impose certain conditions to strike a 4 balance in between the liberty of the applicant and so also the right of investigating agency to make full investigation of the offences reported. Hence Investigating Officer of Crime No. 141/2009 of Arni Police Station is hereby directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the above referred crime, she be released forth on bail, up-till the filing of charge sheet in the said crime, upon executing a PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one surety in like amount subject to to the conditions that applicant (i) shall attend Arni Police Station in connection with the investigation of the said crime everyday in between 11 a.m. & 2 p.m. up-till 18.11.2009 and thereafter whenever called by the said Investigating Officer during day time in connection with investigation, (ii) shall not attempt to hamper progress of ongoing investigation in any manner or to tamper prosecution evidence collected therein (iii) shall not leave the local limits of Arni taluka without prior permission of the competent Court and (iv) shall not commit any offence while being on bail. The application stands disposed of. JUDGE halwai