1 Cri.A.4759.11+1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4759 OF 2011 Sau Varsha Dadasaheb Amte, R/o Belwandi, Tq.Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, ...RESPONDENT. ... Shri.S.S.Jadhavar,Advocate for Applicant. Shri.B.J.Sonwane,A.P.P. for Respondent-State. ... WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4876 OF 2011 Dadasaheb S/o Ashraji Amte, R/o Belwandi, Tq. Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, and another ...RESPONDENT. ... Shri.Sachin S.Deshmukh,Advocate for Applicant. Shri.B.V.Wagh,A.P.P. for Respondent-State. Shri.S.S.Jadhavar,Advocate for Resp.No.2. ... CORAM: R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 15TH NOVEMBER, 2011. 2 Cri.A.4759.11+1 PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for both sides. 2. Present applicant is arrested in connection with FIR I-52 of 2011 of Belwadni Police Station, Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar. According to the prosecution, the applicant is alleged to have assaulted her mother-in-law by name Kamal Ashru Amte with the help of stone. 3. The Post-mortem report indicates as many as seven injuries in the nature of contusion and abrasion. The injuries to the head, skull and brain clearly indicate the fact that those are serious in nature. The post mortem report does not give final opinion, it appears to have been reserved. The injuries caused are certainly serious and have nexus with alleged offence. 4. In the beginning part of investigation, a large number of witnesses have only stated that 3 Cri.A.4759.11+1 they came to know about the death of deceased Kamal. However, in the later part of investigation they have referred to admission of the guilt by way of extra judicial confession by the present applicant before her husband Dadasaheb. In addition to above, the present applicant expressed desire to record her statement under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The said job was done by the concerned authorities and statement of the present applicant under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded by the Special Judicial Magistrate on 12.06.2011. It is pertinent to note that relevant portion of the statement under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure is in the handwriting of the present applicant. 5. With the aforesaid material, the learned counsel for the applicant tried to submit that the applicant is entitled for bail. 6. The present applicant is in custody since 4 Cri.A.4759.11+1 May, 2011. The Court is not required to go into circumstances under which the applicant made a statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Court is required to see whether necessary formalities prior to recording the statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in the course of recording statement are complied with or not? It is pertinent to note that recording of the statement of present applicant under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is in the handwriting of the present applicant. So far as inculpatery portion Hence it need not be doubted. 7. On going through the record prima facie case is made out against the applicant for charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. In my view, looking gravity of the offence and the statements of large number of witnesses, who have stated against the present applicant, this is not a case where the applicant can get bail. Hence, the application is required to be rejected. Hence, the following order is passed: 5 Cri.A.4759.11+1 . Application for bail is rejected. It is clarified that the observations made in this order shall not be used by the trial Court, while conducting the trial. . In view of the order passed in Criminal Application No. 4759 of 2011, nothing further survives for consideration in Criminal Application No. 4876 of 2011, same stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- [ R.Y.GANOO, J.] MTK