1 APPLN340OF2010.sxw vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.340 OF 2010 Mr. Madhukar Bhikan Sonawane, .. Applicant -versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. U. R. Warunjikar for the Applicant. Mr. P.S. Hingorani, APP for the State. CORAM: A. R. JOSHI, J. DATED: 2nd AUGUST 2010 P.C. 1. Heard rival submissions of learned counsel at length on this application for regular bail by the applicant. 2. Allegations against the applicant-husband are that he was illtreating his wife-the deceased since six months after the marriage which took place somewhere in the year 2002. Earlier three incidents are of much significant after marriage so far as the illtreatment and harassment and at times physical torture practiced by the applicant on the deceased. Somewhere in the year 2003, there was an incident in which the victim sustained burn injuries below her waist and when the mother first informant, visited her in the hospital, that time she noticed that the deceased was under 2 APPLN340OF2010.sxw mental pressure. However, it is disclosed that her husband-present applicant had assaulted her. Second incident is of April or May, 2008, that time the deceased had made a telephonic call to her parents and informed as regards to severe assault committed by the applicant and her right ear pinna was cut and for that medical treatment was given to her at the instance of present complainant- her mother. The third incident is of July,2008; wherein the deceased was at the house of her parents, she was taken out on some excuses by the applicant and after longtime, said deceased did not return home and as such search was taken. It was found that on the next day at about 6.00 am, the deceased was found near one hospital and that time she was crying. Regarding said third incident, deceased had disclosed to her parents that on some pretext the applicant had taken her on the motorcycle and assaulted and by taking her to Deccan area and he abandoned her and as such for the entire night deceased was in search of her parent’s house. That time, some complaint was lodged and police had recorded statement of the deceased. 3. After above three incidents, the fateful incident occurred on 5.8.2009. It was a day of “Rakshabandhan”. The applicant reluctantly took his wife -the deceased to house of her parents and their young son aged about 7 years was also accompanying them. Prior to entering house of parents, applicant had a quarrel with her 3 APPLN340OF2010.sxw and he was insisting her not to go in the house of her parents. However, due to auspicious occasion of Rakshabandhan, she insisted on such visit for meeting her brothers. While returning after Rakshabandhan was over, deceased went out and the applicant, deceased and their son left the place on two wheeler. After sometime intimation reached to the house of the complainant that the deceased had sustained some head injuries due to falling down from the vehicle and she has been hospitalized. In the hospital, the deceased was indoor patient till 8.8.2009. On 8.8.2009, at about 5.00 pm, she succumbed to the head injuries. Offence was registered against present applicant and penal section 302 alongwith 498-A and 304-A was applied against the applicant. Complaint was lodged by mother of the deceased on 10.8.2009. Present applicant was arrested on 11.8.2009. 4. During investigation, statement of own boy aged about 7 years i.e son of the deceased and present applicant was recorded in which he specifically mentioned regarding taking of his mother by the applicant, they going back to their home on two wheeler. Due to quarrel between his mother and the applicant, the applicant kicked the deceased and she fell on the road and sustained severe injury to the head. During the arguments, learned counsel for the applicant strenuously argued that it is not matter in which section 302 can be attracted and at the most offence can be 4 APPLN340OF2010.sxw registered u/s 498-A and in that event the custody of the present applicant for about a year is required to be considered while granting the present bail application. It is also argued on behalf of the applicant that the statement of his own son cannot be taken as incriminating circumstance so far actual incident is concerned. It is further argued that had it been the intention of the applicant to do away with his wife, he would not have taken such an intricate method to do away with his wife while driving two wheeler vehicle. 5. Prima facie the matter before the Court is by allegation in the first information report, fortified by the earlier factual position as dealt above regarding three incidences which took place in the year 2003, 2009 and 2009. Such conduct apparently is of much significance so far present bail application is concerned. Another factual position is regarding statement of the son of the deceased which clearly implicate the present applicant, so far role attributed to him is concerned. Otherwise also the person must know consequences of his act; when particularly he is driving his nearest relative on the pillion rider and as in the present case his wife and any negligent act may also cause serious complications. More so, when the act is of deliberate nature as assigned to the present applicant in the present case, All the same whether or not it is a case under the penal provisions of section 302, is a question to be decided at the time of trial about establishment of the guilt. Suffice 5 APPLN340OF2010.sxw it to say at this stage for determining the present application for bail that it is not fit case in which present applicant can be enlarged on bail. Hence order. ORDER i) The Criminal application stands rejected. ii) It is reported that the chargesheet is already filed and the case is committed. Hence directions are given to the concerned learned Additional Sessions Judge to expeditiously deal with the matter according to law without being influenced by the observations in the present application so far as merits of the matter are concerned. ( A. R. JOSHI, J.)