1 criapln3393-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3393 OF 2011 Abhijit Jagannath Pawar .. APPLICANT Vs The State of Maha. ...RESPONDENT ... Shri N.B.Narwade, Adv.for applicant. Shri G.R.Ingole,APP for R-State. ... CORAM : T.V.NALAWADE,J. DATE : 24/08/2011 ORAL ORDER: 1] This application is filed for bail in Crime No.84/11 registered in Shevgaon police station, Dist. Ahmednagar, for offences punishable under Sections 306, 498-A etc. of I.P.C. The applicant is husband of the deceased. Papers of investigation were made available. Both sides are heard. 2] The Sessions Court has rejected application by observing that 2 criapln3393-11 there is possibility of tampering with prosecution witnesses and that there is sufficient material to make out prima facie case against applicant. Previous application bearing No.2258/11 was not pressed before this Court. 3] The papers of investigation show that father of the deceased has given report. The deceased was given in marriage to the applicant on 22/2/11 and the incident took place on 4/5/11. Allegations are made that 50% of dowry amount which was agreed was not given and there was ill treatment on that count. Allegations are made that within 8-10 days of the marriage, present applicant had given severe beating to the deceased by using Bamboo stick and he had driven the deceased out of the matrimonial house. After that deceased had stayed for few days with parents and she had resumed cohabitation again on 3/5/11. She committed suicide by consuming poison on 4/5/11. 4] There are statements of not only relatives of the deceased on parents side but there are statements of neighbours which include Nandkishor. The material collected is sufficient to make out prima facie case for aforesaid offences. It was submitted for the applicant that Nandkishor is ready to file affidavit in support of applicant to show that he has not given statement against applicant before police. Such permission cannot be granted as that may amount to tampering with 3 criapln3393-11 prosecution witnesses. It was submitted that statement of Nandkishor was recorded on 17/6/11 that is after about 1 and ½ month of the incident. It was submitted that statements of some other witnesses were also recorded very late and there was no whisper about exact amount of dowry in the report given by father of deceased. This circumstance cannot be considered at this stage. There are statements at present to show that there was such demand and ill treatment was given on that count. The Court must have expressed on the last occasion that the Court is not inclined to grant the relief and that is why, previous application was not pressed. It was submitted that the present application is filed after filing of the charge sheet. There is no other change in circumstances. The Court expressed that the case can be expedited but the application was pressed. In view of these circumstances and the fact that death took place within few months of the marriage, this Court holds that it is not fit case to grant bail. There is clear possibility of tampering with prosecution witnesses. So the application stands rejected. [T.V.NALAWADE,J.] umg/criapln3393-11