:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4030 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4030 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4030 OF 2005 Shri. Sampat Babaso Jagadale & Anr. ...Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Shri.R.V.Bansode for the Applicants. Ms.S.D. Shinde A.P.P. for the Respondent. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATED : JULY 04, 2005. DATED : JULY 04, 2005. DATED : JULY 04, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. The Applicant NO.1 is the father-in-law of the deceased and the Applicant NO.2 is mother-in-law of the deceased. The F.I.R. has been registered at the instance of the father of the deceased daughter-in-law for the offences punishable under sections 306, 498-A, 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. After having heard the Counsel appearing for the parties, I find that there is enough material on record to indicate the complicity of the Applicants. Alongwith the daughter-in-law of the Applicants, the daughter of the Applicants who is stated to be on very friendly terms with the daughter-in-law were found dead. The case of the prosecution is that the dead bodies of the daughter-in-law of the Applicants and the daughter of the Applicants were found in a well. The allegation of the prosecution is that without informing the parents of the daughter-in-law her dead body were cremeted hurriedly at the instance of the Applicant No.1. The prosecution case is that there were phone calls made by the daughter-in-law of the :2: Applicants on the date of the incident by the deceased with a view to communicate to her parents the illtreatment received at hands of the Applicants. On the next day the daughter-in-law was found dead in a well. 3. Considering the material on record and considering the allegations of the prosecution regarding death of the daughter-in-law and daughter of the Applicants together, this is not a case where the Applicants can be enlarged on bail. 4. At this stage, the learned Advocate appearing for the Applicants prays that he may be permitted to withdraw this Application with liberty to file fresh Application. As I am not inclined to enlarge the Applicants on bail, this request cannot be considered. 5. As stated earlier, considering the gravity of offence and seriousness of the allegations against the Applicants, I find no reason to take a view different from the view which is taken by the Sessions Court. Hence, Application is rejected. 6. As the Applicant No.2 is woman, if there is Fast Track Court available at Satara which is empowered to try the case, the learned Sessions Judge will transfer :3: the case to Fast Track Court for ensuring the expeditious disposal of the trial. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE