Cri. Apln. 2262 & 2281 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2262 OF 2011 1. Balasaheb s/o. Suryabhan Gulve, 2. Alka w/o. Balasaheb Gulve, Both R/o. Gogalgaon, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar. ....Applicants. Versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent. Mr. S.S. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for applicant. Mr. G.R. Ingole, APP for State/respondent. WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2281 OF 2011 Sandip s/o. Balasaheb Gulve, R/o. Gogalgaon, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar. ....Applicants. Versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent. Mr. S.S. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for applicant. Mr. G.R. Ingole, APP for State/respondent. CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 20th June, 2011. Cri. Apln. 2262 & 2281 of 2011 2 PER COURT : 1. Both the applications are filed for bail in Cr. No. 63/2011 registered in Loni Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for offences punishable under sections 306, 498-A, 34 etc. of the Indian Penal Code. The APP has made papers of investigation available for perusal. Both the sides are heard. 2. The crime is registered on the basis of report given by brother of the deceased. The deceased was given in the marriage to son of applicants from the first proceedings on 21.5.2009. Allegations are made in the report that there was a demand of two tola gold and of Rs. 50,000/- from the side of husband and his relatives. Allegations are made that there was need of Rs. 50,000/- for the education of the applicant from the second proceedings and on 4.5.2011 he had demanded such amount and also given threat. Incident took place on 5.5.2011. The papers of investigation show that deceased died due to poisoning. 3. The advocate for the applicants submitted that all the applicants came to be arrested immediately after the registration of the crime and even police custody was not asked for the purpose of investigation. He submitted that bottle of poison was produced by applicant No. 2 of the first proceedings and there is such mention in the record. He has further submitted that village of complainant is different and there is no possibility of tampering with the prosecution witnesses. In view of the Cri. Apln. 2262 & 2281 of 2011 3 nature of the offence, this Court holds that bail can be granted to present applicants, subject to some conditions. 4. So both applications are allowed. Applicants from both the proceedings are to be released on bail on furnishing PR and SB of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand), each. Applicants are not to tamper with the prosecution witnesses and they are not to enter in the village Loni where the complainant and his relatives reside. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] ssc/criapln2262/2281/11