1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application (BA) No. 483/2011 Kisan Gangaram Gayakwad V/s. State of Maharashtra through P.S.O. P.S. Ansingh, Tq. & Distt. Washim Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. S. A. Mohta, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. C. N. Adgokar, A.P.P. for the Non-Applicant CORAM : U.V. BAKRE, J. DATED : 11.10.2011. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This application for bail has been filed by the applicant, who has been arrested on 19/03/2011 in Crime No. 16/2011 registered at Police Station Ansing for offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation is that the husband of the deceased namely Narayan Jadhav, his brother namely Mahadeo Jadhav and his uncle namely Kisan Gayakwad (present applicant) administered poison to the deceased Sangita and also throttled her, as a result of which she died. 4. It is seen that there is no direct evidence in the matter and the case rests only on circumstantial evidence. In the F.I.R., it is stated that some days prior to the incident, eight persons including the deceased and her husband had gone to Rajani Sugar Factory as labourers but after working for 15 days the husband of the deceased along with the deceased and 4 other labourers left the work and ran away. It is further alleged that on account of the above, the two remaining labourers were caught due to which, the six labourers who had run away returned back and the husband of the deceased had to return back 1 lakh rupees to the Sugar Factory. It 2 appears that the husband of the deceased was under impression that he was cheated by the father of the deceased and hence he was ill-treating the deceased. It is alleged that on 17/03/2011, the husband of the deceased, his brother and the applicant administered poison to her and strangulated her due to which she died. The above is therefore mere suspicion. 5. Considering the old age of the applicant and the role attributed to him, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to bail since the charge-sheet has already been filed. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No. 16/2011 registered at Police Station Ansing for offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, upon execution of personal recognition bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount under the conditions that the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witness and shall not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court. 7. Application stands disposed of accordingly. Hamdast allowed. JUDGE Punde.