1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 44 of 2008 i) Chahabai Laxmibai Bajirao Bhagwat ii) Shakubai Shakuntala vijay Ware iii)Vijay Shankar Ware .. Applicants versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ... Mr.A.P. Mundargi i/b Ashish G. Gaikwad for the applicant. Mrs.M.M. Deshmukh APP for the State. W I T H W I T H W I T H CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 147 of 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 147 of 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 147 of 2008 i) Kaluram Bajirao Bhagwat ii) Shivaji Bajirao Bhagwat .. Applicants versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ... Mr.A.P. Mundargi i/b Ashish G. Gaikwad for the applicant. Mr.U.V. Nikam APP for the State. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J DATED : 23rd January 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard. 2 2. Both these applications are filed in connection with the same offence viz. offence registered with Shikrapur police station under C.R.No.183 of 2007 punishable u/s.498A, 506, 304B r/w sec.34 of the IPC. Hence both these applications are disposed of by this common order. 3. Marriage between Vaishali (hereinafter referred to as ’the deceased’) and Kaluram took place on 29th February 2000 at Nimgaon. The deceased is alleged to have committed suicide on 23rd November 2007 on account of the harassment for dowry caused to her by her husband and other family members. FIR was lodged by father of the deceased on 29th November 2007. In pursuance of the FIR, Kaluram, husband of the deceased and his brother Shivaji have been arrested. Criminal Application no.147 of 2008 has been filed by them in this court after their application for bail was rejected by the learned Addl. Adhoc Judge Sessions Judge no. 11 Pune vide its order dated 15th December 2007. Criminal Application no.44 of 2008 is filed by the mother in law, and the sister in law of the deceased and the husband of the sister in law, for pre-arrest bail. 3 4. At the outset it may be noted that the death has occurred after 7 years of marriage and presumption u/s.113-A of the Evidence Act is not applicable. In the FIR, the father of the deceased alleged that when the deceased came to him after about a year of the marriage she told him that her husband, husband’s brother, mother in law, sister in law and husband of the sister in law were harassing her and demanding dowry of Rs.50,000/- for securing employment to her husband. The allegation of the demand of dowry was repeated by the deceased to her father in July 2007. There is no allegation of demand of dowry in the intervening period of more than six years from the year 2001 to 2007. 5. In the complaint, father of the deceased stated that the deceased told him that the dowry was being demanded for securing employment to her husband. The applicant has produced on record a copy of the certificate issued by the Mhashoba Shikashan Prasarak Mandal and signed by its Vice President that Kaluram, the husband of the deceased was in the , employment of the Sanstha, as a peon since 4th August 1998. The case that dowry was demanded for the purpose of securing employment to the husband of the deceased is not supported by any evidence and in fact the husband was already employed. 4 6. The father of the deceased has subsequently made an affidavit dated 10th January 2008 before a Notary Public and a copy thereof has been filed on record. In the said affidavit, the father has stated that complaint was made by him on account of misunderstanding and anger arising out of the death of his daughter. He has stated that he has since come to know the true facts viz. On 29th November 2007, the deceased had a quarrel with Vatsala Sopan Gawate on a water tap and on account of the quarrel, the relatives of Vatsala assaulted her and she was even paraded half nude. If this affidavit is believed, it is quite possible that the deceased committed a suicide not out of the alleged demand of dowry but on account of insult suffered by her on account of her half nude parading. 7. In any event, there is no evidence on record about the involvement of the sister in law and her husband. Both of them reside in a different village at a distance of about 60 kms. This fact corroborates the statement made in the affidavit by the father of the deceased that he lodged a complaint out of anger perhaps wrongly involving all the relatives of the husband of the deceased. 5 8. Taking an overall view of the matter, I am of the opinion that both the applications deserved to be allowed. In the circumstances, I pass the following order:- O R D E R . Criminal Application no.44 of 2008 is allowed. The applicants therein, if arrested in the aforesaid crime, be released on bail on personal bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount. This order of anticipatory bail would come to an end on charge-sheet being filed against them and they may thereafter apply for regular bail before the appropriate court. . Criminal Application no.147 of 2008 i allowed. The applicants therein be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid crime on personal bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount. . This order is subject to the condition that the applicants in both the applications shall not make any inducement or threats to any of the prosecution witnesses and shall co-operate with the investigation and shall attend the police station as 6 and when summoned specifically by the police. (D.G. KARNIK, J)