1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1446 OF 2010 (Gulab Rohidas Chavan and another .v. State of Maharashtra) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri S.V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for the applicants. Shri J.B. Jaiswal, APP for the respondent/State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J. 29TH SEPTEMBER, 2010. Heard. Learned Counsel for the applicants initially submits that he is not pressing the application in respect of applicant No.1 Gulab Rohidas Chavan. Hence, the same is rejected. In respect of applicant No.2, learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations against applicant No.2 are very vague. He submits that the material available with the investigating agency which is in the form of charge sheet discloses that soon before the death of Sonubai, she was subjected at the hands of applicant No.2 for asking dowry. Learned Counsel further submits that the statements of the witnesses on which the investigating agency is relying upon are mainly the near relatives of deceased Sonubai and even considering their statements, the allegations against applicant No.2 are that on 24.04.2010, when these witnesses had been to the village Belkhed to visit Sonubai and when Sonubai offered them a cup of tea, applicant No.2 made some taunts. Apart from this statement, there is no positive material brought by the investigating agency on record so as to show that applicant No.2 made any demand as alleged by the complainant soon before the death of Sonubai. Learned Counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant No.2 is a lady and she will abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He further submits that another lady co-accused i.e. daughter of applicant No.2 is already released on bail. The allegations are of the similar nature against the other co-accused. 2 I have gone through the record submitted by the learned APP. The statement of Vijay Pawar and the other witnesses show that there are allegations of demand of amount for construction of house. Regarding the incident of 24.04.2010, the witnesses say that applicant No.2 made remarks. The same are treated as the taunts given by applicant No.2. The record also reveals that the investigation is concluded by filing charge sheet. Taking overall view of the matter, the application is partly allowed. Applicant No.2 – Kesarbai Rohidas Chavan is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount, on the following conditions. (i) The applicant No.2 to cooperate with the investigating agency and attend the Police Station, Pimpalgaon Raja on every 1st and 3rd Sunday between 09:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon. (ii) The applicant No.2 shall not tamper with the evidence nor commit any act such as contacting the prosecution witnesses or pressurize them. (iii) The applicant No.2 to submit her residential address and her contact numbers such as phone/mobile numbers to the investigating agency. (iv) In case the applicant No.2 is moving out of the area of Police Station, Pimpalgaon Raja, she shall inform the Police Station about his visit to other place. In case of breach of these conditions, the prosecution agency to take necessary steps in accordance with the provisions of law. JUDGE *rrg.